Skip to main content

Full text of "Axis Rule In Occupied Europe Raphael Lemkin"

See other formats



Laws of Occupation * Analysis of Government 
Proposals for Redress 




Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 
Division of International Law 
700 Jackson Place, N. W. 






The major part of this volume comprises the texts of laws and decrees of 
the Axis Powers, and of their puppet regimes, issued for the government of 
the areas occupied by their military forces in Europe. Preceding these 
texts are chapters analyzing the purposes and application of the measures 
as parts of a general scheme of conquest. Other chapters show the organiza¬ 
tion of the occupying government set up in each invaded country and the 
special measures adopted for it. 

The law of military occupation does not accord to the armed forces of an 
invader unlimited power over the inhabitants temporarily under his control. 
Under this law, as officially interpreted nearly half a century ago by the 
President of the United States during the war with Spain in 1898, the in¬ 
habitants of occupied territory “are entitled to security in their persons and 
property and in all their private rights and relations,” and it is the duty of 
the commander of the army of occupation “to protect them in their homes, 
in their employments, and in their personal and religious rights.” Further, 
“the municipal laws of the conquered territory, such as affect private rights 
of person and property and provide for the punishment of crime, are con¬ 
sidered as continuing in force” and are “to be administered by the ordinary 
tribunals, substantially as they were before the occupation.” 1 

The author of the present volume, Dr. Raphael Lemkin, a noted Polish 
scholar and attorney, has pointed out the many instances and particulars 
in which the acts of the Axis Powers fall far below the humane standards 
previously established, especially those of the laws and customs of war as 
codified by the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, which sought to 
diminish the evils of war by placing the inhabitants of occupied territories 
“under the protection and the rule of the principles of the law of nations, 
as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the 
laws of humanity, and the dictates of the public conscience.” 

The liberators of Nazi-occupied Europe will be faced with stupendous 
tasks not only of relief and rehabilitation but of restoring family ties and 
aiding in the repair of the damage done as far as possible. Measures of 
personal and property reparation must precede the rebuilding of a peaceful 
world founded upon law and order. The author suggests some modes and 
agencies of redress. Whether these suggestions or others be adopted, the 

1 General Orders No. 101, July 18, 1898, Foreigfi Relations of the United States, 1898, p. 783. 
For the similar order to the American Expeditionary Forces when they entered the Rhine¬ 
land in November, 1918. see General Orders No. 218, November 28, 1918, reproduced by 
Maj. Gen. Henry T. Allen, U.S.A., The Rhineland Occupation (Indianapolis: The Bobbs- 
Merrill Company, 1927), p. 68. For the expression of appreciation by the German Govern¬ 
ment of the conduct of the American occupying forces, see the Chancellor’s communication to 
the American commander upon the withdrawal of the troops in January, 1923, op. cit., p. 288. 




volume, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe , gives in readily accessible form in the 
English language the basic documents and essential factual information from 
authentic sources that will be urgently needed when the process starts of un¬ 
tangling the spider web of Axis legislation which has enmeshed the lives and 
wrecked the fortunes of millions of human beings whose only fault was that 
they were unable to defend themselves against the modern Juggernaut of 
total war. It is in this sense that the work is offered as a contribution to¬ 
ward the restoration of peace based upon justice. 

George A. Finch 

Director , Division of International Law 

August /<?, iq44 


The present book grew out of a desire to give an analysis, based upon 
objective information and evidence, of the rule imposed upon the occupied 
countries of Europe by the Axis Powers—Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bul¬ 
garia, and Rumania. This regime is totalitarian in its method and spirit. 
Every phase of life, even the most intimate, is covered by a network of laws 
and regulations which create the instrumentalities of a most complete admin¬ 
istrative control and coercion. Therefore these laws of occupation are an 
extremely valuable source of information regarding such government and 
its practices. For the outside world they provide undeniable and objective 
evidence regarding the treatment of the subjugated peoples of Europe by the 
Axis Powers. The author feels that such evidence is especially necessary 
for the Anglo-Saxon reader, who, with his innate respect for human rights and 
human personality, may be inclined to believe that the Axis regime could not 
possibly be as cruel and ruthless as it has been hitherto described. These 
laws imposed upon the populations of occupied Europe are very revealing. 
The occupant has not refrained from formulating as law, dictates which are 
in fact very grave outrages against humanity and international law, against 
human rights, morality, and religion. One finds in them, for example, 
evidence in the form of provisions for confiscations of private property based 
upon a presumption of future guilt, and for the prohibition of the use of 
their own language by the population of an occupied country, and such 
evidence of moral debasement as clauses providing for subsidies to women 
of subjugated peoples for having illegitimate children by members of the 
YVchrmacht. The author therefore believed that a collection of occupation 
laws was essential to supplement an analysis of the Axis regime. 

The collection was made by selecting the more representative laws and 
decrees for each country and for each phase of life. These laws of occupation 
were promulgated not only by the Axis partners themselves but also by pup¬ 
pet regimes and puppet states, which were established in Norway, Serbia, 
Croatia, Slovakia, the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, and to a 
certain extent in Vichy France, as well as by the Secretaries General of the 
Ministries in Belgium and the Netherlands. The collection forms the third 
part of the book, while Part I seeks to present a rational synthesis of the 
techniques of occupation, and Part II analyzes the regime in each occupied 
country. It has been necessary to adopt such a method of presentation 
because of the great complexity of the problems involved and also because 
it was deemed essential to stress local peculiarities in the various countries. 
Since the German Axis partner is the leader and the main organizer of the 
system, the first part deals exclusively with German techniques of occupa- 




tion, whereas the techniques of occupation followed by other Axis partners 
are dealt with in the framework of the analysis of the regime in the respec¬ 
tive countries. 

The first part is divided into chapters treating different aspects of 
government. The chapter on Administration (Chapter I) shows how the 
Germans have, in violation of international law, incorporated into the Reich 
large areas of the occupied countries, and how the administration of the 
incorporated areas differs from the administration of the non-in corpora ted 
areas. With their traditional predilection for theories, the Germans have 
applied the racial theory in effecting these incorporations on the assumption 
that the incorporated areas are inhabited by Germans, whereas for the 
non-incorporated areas they have applied the Lebe?israu?n theory. The mul¬ 
tiple administrative divisions of the occupied countries (Yugoslavia has 
been divided into ten units, France into five, Poland five, Greece five, and 
so on) serve the purpose of weakening and crushing the resistance of the 
captive nations by dividing and enclosing them in separate territorial units, 
hermetically scaled one from another. The chapter on Police (Chapter II) 
is an attempt to make clear the especially important rdle and functions of the 
Gestapo and the S.S. ( Schutzstaffeln ) in Germany and in the occupied 
countries, and in particular to show that the crimes ascribed to them are 
not simply a result of the ill-will of individual members but are mainly an 
essential part of the program of their activities and even of their world 
outlook. The chapter on Law (Chapter III) presents evidence of the fact 
that German law imposed upon the occupied countries is bereft of moral 
content and of respect for human rights. It is not conceived as human 
justice but it invokes legal techniques simply as a means of administrative 
coercion. Indeed it appears obvious that the occupant does not respect the 
limitations imposed by the Hague Convention. He has adopted a unilater¬ 
ally utilitarian conception of law—law is that which is useful to the German 
nation; and in this respect the present rulers of Germany are using essentially 
the same conception of law which was used by Bethmann-Hollweg in 1914, 
when he declared that necessity knows no law. The organization of the 
courts (Chapter IV) reminds one vividly of the Fehme tribunals of the 
Middle Ages. The chapter on Property (Chapter V) bears witness to the 
fact that the occupant has enriched not only the Reich but also individual 
Germans, and that by permitting only politically desirable persons to 
possess property, the occupant has converted the institution of property 
into a powerful political weapon. As for Finance (Chapter VI), it is ad¬ 
ministered in such a way as to make the occupied countries pay not only the 
costs of occupation (to an unjustified extent) but also a large part of the costs 
of the war, thus shifting much of the financial burden from the shoulders 
of German citizens to those of the people of each occupied country. An 
elaborate financial system, functioning through instrumentalities of inflated 



currency and forced borrowing by clearing, helps Germany to seize the 
economic substance of the occupied lands in such a shrewd way that in some 
countries there is even created an atmosphere of false business prosperity 
similar to the hazy state of mind of intoxicated persons. The economy of 
the subjugated countries has been put in a straitjacket of regulations, con¬ 
trolling its every stage from the production and procurement of raw materials 
up to their distribution and shipment to Germany and the consumption of 
finished goods. Mediaeval guilds have been revived in the form of compul¬ 
sory-membership groups controlling trades and occupations. The right to 
engage in a trade or profession is made subject to the permission of the 
authorities, the granting of such permission being dependent upon such 
factors as the citizenship and political reliability of the applicant. As 
regards Labor generally (Chapter VII), it is clear that conscription and de¬ 
portations to Germany are squeezing the manpower of occupied Europe, 
disrupting families, and undermining permanently the health of the workers. 
The extremely inhuman treatment of Jews (Chapter VIII) serves as a prop¬ 
aganda device for the promotion of the anti-Christian idea of the inequality 
of human beings and of German racial superiority. 

The picture of coordinated German techniques of occupation must lead 
to the conclusion that the German occupant has embarked upon a gigantic 
scheme to change, in favor of Germany, the balance of biological forces be¬ 
tween it and the captive nations for many years to come. The objective of 
this scheme is to destroy or to cripple the subjugated peoples in their develop¬ 
ment so that, even in the case of Germany’s military defeat, it will be in a 
position to deal with other European nations from the vantage point of nu¬ 
merical, physical, and economic superiority. Despite the bombings of Ger¬ 
many, this German superiority will be fully evident after hostilities have 
ceased and for many years to follow, when, due to the present disastrous 
state of nourishment and health in the occupied countries, we shall see in such 
countries a stunted post-war generation, survivors of the ill-fed children of 
these war years. 

I he practice of extermination of nations and ethnic groups as carried out 
by the invaders is called by the author “genocide,” a term deriving from the 
Greek word gems (tribe, race) and the Latin ride (by way of analogy, see 
homocide, fratricide) and is treated in a chapter under the same name 
(Chapter IX). Genocide is effected through a synchronized attack on differ¬ 
ent aspects of life of the captive peoples: in the political field (by destroying 
institutions of self-government and imposing a German pattern of adminis¬ 
tration, and through colonization by Germans); in the social field (by 
disrupting the social cohesion of the nation involved and killing or removing 
elements such as the intelligentsia, which provide spiritual leadership— 
according to Hitler s statement in Mein Kampf , “the greatest of spirits can 
be liquidated if its bearer is beaten to death with a rubber truncheon”); in 



the cultural field (by prohibiting or destroying cultural institutions and 
cultural activities; by substituting vocational education for education in 
the liberal arts, in order to prevent humanistic thinking, which the occupant 
considers dangerous because it promotes national thinking); in the economic 
field (by shifting the wealth to Germans and by prohibiting the exercise of 
trades and occupations by people who do not promote Germanism “without 
reservations’’); in the biological field (by a policy of depopulation and by 
promoting procreation by Germans in the occupied countries); in the field 
of physical existence (by introducing a starvation rationing system for non- 
Germans and by mass killings, mainly of Jews, Poles, Slovenes, and Rus¬ 
sians); in the religious field (by interfering with the activities of the Church, 
which in many countries provides not only spiritual but also national 
leadership); in the field of morality (by attempts to create an atmosphere 
of moral debasement through promoting pornographic publications and 
motion pictures, and the excessive consumption of alcohol). 

The other Axis partners—Italy, Hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria—and 
the puppet partners Slovakia and Croatia have assimilated their behavior 
to that of the German master. Montesquieu has said that one must make 
the choice between liberty and glory. These Axis states (Italy made its 
choice earlier) have introduced totalitarian systems of government and 
have engaged in the “glory” of conquest, adopting techniques similar to 
those of the Germans. 


The subtitle of this book refers to proposals for redress. The author 
believes that the grave dislocation of demographic, economic, and cultural 
values brought about by the occupant should be remedied after the war 
as much as possible in behalf of the dispossessed and mistreated, and that 
the considerable numbers of Germans responsible for the great carnage and 
looting should be punished or reduced to a condition in which they may not 
again be dangerous to the social order and international peace. As a part 
of the system needed for that purpose the author proposes an administrative- 
judicial machinery for the restoration of property to dispossessed persons of 
occupied countries, namely, one international property restitution agency, 
national property restitution agencies in each interested country, and prop¬ 
erty restitution tribunals, both national and international. 

Because of the financial situation in the occupied countries and in par¬ 
ticular because of the dependence of their actual financial structures upon 
Berlin and the Reichsmark, it is proposed that the liquidation of the finan¬ 
cial consequences of occupation be handled by a specially created interna¬ 
tional agency for liquidation of occupation finance. Such an agency, with 
temporary regional interests and scope of activities, should also collaborate, 
in a broader and more permanent plan for the reconstruction of world finance, 
with other international financial agencies. 



The exploitation by German employers and the German State of millions 
of workers from the occupied countries calls for reimbursement to the latter 
of amounts due to them but appropriated by the employer or the German 

The alarming increase of barbarity with the advent of Hitler led the 
author to make a proposal to the Fifth International Conference for the Uni¬ 
fication of Penal Law (held in Madrid in 1933, in cooperation with the Fifth 
Committee of the League of Nations) to the effect that an international 
treaty should be negotiated declaring that attacks upon national, religious, 
and ethnic groups should be made international crimes, and that perpetrators 
of such crimes should not only be liable to trial in their own countries but, in 
the event of escape, could also be tried in the place of refuge, or else extra¬ 
dited to the country where the crime was committed. His proposal not hav¬ 
ing been adopted at that time, he feels impelled to renew it now after the 
world has been faced with the tragic experiences of German rule. The ne¬ 
gotiation of such a treaty at the present time by all nations of the civilized 
world, both belligerents and neutrals, would provide not only a more ade¬ 
quate basis of substantive law for the punishment of war criminals but also 
the necessary procedural machinery for the extradition of such criminals by 
members of the United Nations and neutrals. Moreover, it would also pro¬ 
vide an adequate machinery for the international protection of national and 
ethnic groups against extermination attempts and oppression in time of peace. 

The problem of redress cannot be treated by the author exhaustively at 
the present moment. The author is aware of the fact that redress should be 
full and embrace not only additional aspects, both economic and legal, but it 
should also involve important political and moral considerations based upon 
the responsibility of the German people treated as an entirety. 

Many facts speak for such responsibility. The present destruction of 
Europe would not be as complete and thorough had the German people not 
accepted freely its plan, participated voluntarily in its execution, and up to 
this point profited greatly therefrom. Hitler’s Mein Kampf has essentially 
formulated the prolegomenon of destruction and subjugation of other na¬ 
tions. The mere fact that the vast majority of the German people put Hit¬ 
ler into power through free elections is evidence that they freely accepted his 
program which was secret to nobody. 

All important classes and groups of the population have voluntarily as¬ 
sisted Hitler in the scheme of world domination: the military, by training the 
reserves and working out plans of conquest; the business men, by penetrating 
and disrupting foreign economies through cartels, patent devices, and clear¬ 
ing agreements; the propagandists, by organizing Germans abroad and pre¬ 
paring fifth columns in countries to be occupied; the scientists, by elaborating 
doctrines for German hegemony; the educators, by arming spiritually the 
German youth. 



The German techniques of exploitation of the subjugated nations are so 
numerous, thoughtful, and elaborate, and are so greatly dependent upon per¬ 
sonal skill and responsibility, that this complex machinery could not have 
been successful without devotion to the cause of the persons in control. 

The practical ancient Roman had a proverb —facit cui prodesl (he in 
whose interest it was, did it). Indeed, all groups of the German nation had 
their share in the spoils of occupied Europe. The German Hausfrau used for 
her family the food of all occupied countries, Polish geese, Yugoslav pigs, 
French wine, Danish butter, Greek olives, Norwegian fish; the German 
industrialist used French and Polish coal, Russian lumber; the German em¬ 
ployer in agriculture and industry used for his greater profit imported con¬ 
script labor; the German business man bought up foreign interests and prop¬ 
erties, taking advantage of the debasement of non-German currencies; the 
importer benefited through low prices and compulsory credits; and by Hit¬ 
ler’s decree of July 28, 1942, the access to women in occupied countries was 
facilitated for German manhood by fiat of law. 

German militarism has been very stubborn. Germany has attacked her 
neighbors five times since 1864, and in every one of these five wars the 
methods of occupation and spoliation increased in thoroughness inversely as 
the ethical level of the aggressors sank lower and lower. Other nations in 
recent and past times have had cycles of militarism in their history (the 
Spaniards, Swedes, Danes, French, and many others). However, German 
militarism is the most virulent because it is based upon a highly developed 
national and racial emotionalism which by means of modern technology can 
be released upon the world in a much more efficient and destructive way than 
any of the pedestrian methods of earlier wars. 

The United Nations in the present war are faced with a tremendous task: 
to destroy this amalgamation of master-race mythology and aggressive tech¬ 
nology which makes of the German people a kind of technified myth that 
stupefies the world. They should plan to replace the aggressive industrial 
potential by objectively more peaceful patterns of economic life, such as for 
example, agriculture, and by creating such political and spiritual conditions 
that the Germans will be impelled to replace their theory of master race by a 
theory of a master morality, international law, and true peace. 


The preparation of this volume was begun by the author as early as 1940 
in Sweden. It was continued through 1941 and 1942 at Duke University in 
Durham, North Carolina, and later on was further continued and brought to 
completion in Washington. A great part of the documents from the author’s 
private collection had previously been submitted to certain Government in¬ 
stitutions, from which permission was secured to publish them later on. 

In the preparation of this volume the author was fortunate in having the 
invaluable assistance of individual persons and institutions. First, grateful 



acknowledgment is due to the Division of International Law of the Carnegie 
Endowment for International Peace and to Mr. George A. Finch, its Direc¬ 
tor, for making possible the volume’s publication and for providing facilities 
which made it possible for the author to bring the work to an early com¬ 
pletion. Appreciation and gratitude are hereby expressed to the following 
members of the staff of the Division of International Law: to Mr. Alan T. 
Hurd for his supervision of the editing of the text; to Miss Ruth E. Stanton 
for her skilful and thoughtful editing of the manuscript; and to Miss Mary 
Emily King for her intelligent and considerate aid in the arduous task of tran¬ 
scribing the entire text and in certain phases of reference work. The author 
is also grateful to the Endowment’s Library staff, and in particular to the 
Librarian, Miss Helen Lawrence Scanlon, and to her assistant, Miss Clara K. 
Van Nest, for their many courtesies and their assistance in supplying books, 
documents, and other material. 

Especial acknowledgment is due to the Law Library of Congress, and in 
particular to the late John T. Vance and to Mr. James B. Childs, Dr. Vladi¬ 
mir Gsovski, and Dr. Constantine D. Kojouharoff, for the facilities extended 
to the author; and to the Library of Duke University for establishing a 
special documentation center on laws of occupation at the suggestion of the 

As the present work involved many different countries, problems, and lan¬ 
guages, the author was happy to have the assistance and profit by the sug¬ 
gestions of the following persons, to whom he hereby expresses his deep ap¬ 
preciation and gratitude: Professor Bryan Bolich, Professor Robert T. Cole, 
Mr. Gabriel Dichter, Mrs. Eleanor Lansing Dulles, Dr. Philip K. Edwards, 
Mrs. Florence J. Harriman, Dr. Ernest Hoor, Dean H. Claude Horack, Mr. 
Zygmunt Karpinski, Miss Carolyn W. Keen, Mr. Josef Laufer, Mrs. Nor¬ 
man M. Littell, Professor Malcolm McDermott, Dr. Vladimir Palic, and 
Professor Robert R. Wilson. 

The views set forth in this volume are the personal views of the author and 
are not to be ascribed to any other person or to any institution or agency 
with which he is or has been connected. 

Raphael Lemkin 

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, 

and Washington, D. C., November 15, 1943 










The Administrative Territorial Units. 

Incorporated Areas. 

Non-incorporated Areas. 



Forced ‘ 4 Cooperat ion ”. 


Types of Administration.. 

German Administration. 

District Administration by “ Gauleiters u |. 

Administration by Reich Commissioners and Governors. 

Administration by Military Commanders. 

Local Administration. 

Puppet Governments and Puppet States. 

Headless or Subcabinet Governments. 

Utilization of Services of Minor Authorities.. ... 

Utilization of Services of All Existing Governmental Authorities 
Usurpation of Sovereignty. 














German Police in General. 


The S. S. and the Gestapo. 

Differentiation of German Police. 

Police and the Law. 


Political Indoctrination. 

The Responsibilities of the Police and the S.S. in the Occupied Countries 


Discretionary Power. 

Police as Colonizers.... 

Liquidation of Politically Undesirable Persons and of the Jews. 


Local Police. 

The S.S. and Police and War Crimes. 

1 $ 












Introduction of German Law. 2 5 

Changes in Local Law. 2 ” 

Departures from Law. 2 7 

The Principle of Analogy in Criminal Law. 27 

Other Departures from Law Ordered by the Occupant. 29 







German Courts. 3 2 

Military Courts. 33 

Special Courts. 33 

Courts Martial. . . ... ...... . 34 

German Courts of General Jurisdiction. 34 

Local Courts of the Occupied Countries. 34 


New Methods in Treatment of Property by the Occupant... 3b 

State Property. 37 

Private Property... 37 

Control of Transactions in Property. 39 

Buying Devices. 39 

The Occupant and the Communistic System of Property. 39 

Plan for Restitution of Property after Liberation. 4 ° 

Transactions with the Occupant and with Other Persons. 41 

Restitution of Property Carried into Germany. 4 2 

Restitution of Property within the Limits of One Occupied Territory. 43 

Acquisition by Neutral Countries, Other Occupied Countries, or Axis Coun¬ 
tries other than Germany. 43 

The Problem of Good Faith in Acquisition and Repayment of the Price. 44 

The Problem of the Colonists. . . .. 45 

The Responsibilities of the Administrators of Sequestrated Property. 45 

Restitution Agencies and Tribunals. 4b 

Property Restitution Agencies. 4b 

Property Restitution Tribunals. 48 


German Practices and the Plea of Military Necessity. 5 ° 

Currency..—. 5 1 

German Currency. 5 1 

Local Currencies. 5 2 

Central Banks and Currency Services. 53 

Exchange Control. 5 b 

Confiscation of Gold Reserves and Foreign Exchange. 57 

Clearing as an Instrumentality of Exploitation of Foreign Trade and Labor 58 

Bilateral Clearing. 59 

Multilateral Clearing. 61 

Freezing of the Savings of Foreign Labor. 62 

Clearing Legislation and International Law. 62 

Taxation. 63 

Costs of Occupation. 64 

Liquidation Agency for Occupation Finance. 65 


Control of Labor. 67 

Procurement of Labor. 68 

Wages. 69 

Economic Background. 69 

Racial Differentiation. 70 

Restriction on Social Legislation. 71 

The Labor Regime under International Law. 72 








Genocide—A New Term and New Conception for Destruction of Nations 

Techniques of Genocide in Various Fields. 






Physical... . . 

Racial Discrimination in Feeding. 

Endangering of Health. 

Mass Killings. 



Recommendations for the Future. 

Prohibition of Genocide in War and Peace.' • * • 

International Control of Occupation Practices. 









■ s< > 





Basic Statute. 


Italian Administration. 

Albanian Administration. 


Albanian Fascist Party.... 

Fascist Upper Corporative Council. 

Central Council of Corporative Economy. 

Italian Propaganda. 

Economic Control. 

Customs Union.^. 

Italian Economic Penetration. 

Criminal Law... 

Police Internment. 


International Status of Albania. 


Pre-Invasion Period. 

The Anschluss. 1 * 


International Status of Austria. 

















CHAPTER XII. BALTIC STATES (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia). 117 

German Administration. 

Administration by Local Population 


Seizure of Property. 

Return to Private Property. 









Incorporation of Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet 






Chapter XIII. Belgium —Continued 

Economy and Finance. 126 

Reparations. 128 


Sudetenland. *3* 

The Munich Agreement. *3* 

Administration. *3 2 

Reparations to Germans.. 1 3.3 

Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. 133 

Establishment of the Protectorate. 133 

Administration. *35 

Citizenship. *35 

Courts. # ..... 136 

Control of Industries. 13 b 

Control of Trades and Occupations. 136 

Property... 1 37 

The Privileged Situation of the Germans. 137 

Jews... 13 ^ 

Genocide and Resistance. 138 

Slovakia. *39 

Establishment of the State.... 139 

Constitution and Administration. 14 1 

Law and Courts. 14 2 

Genocide Legislation. *43 

Finance. *43 

Control of Property. 143 

The Highland Territories and Subcarpathia (Incorporated into Hungary). 144 

The Doctrine of the Holy Crown. 144 

The Highland Territories. 14 b 

Incorporation (Vienna Award). 14 b 

Representation in Parliament. 147 

Administration. *47 

Annulment of Agrarian Reforms. 149 

Currency.... * 5° 

Subcarpathia....'..... 1 5° 

I ncorporation.. 1 5° 

Representation in Parliament. 15 * 

Administration. 15 2 

Citizenship. 153 

Currency. *53 


Background. *54 

Incorporation. *55 


Invasion.. 157 

Occupation. 15 8 

Administration...... . .. I 5 8 

Accession to the Anti-Comintern Pact and Anticommunistic Legislation. . . 160 

Labor. 161 

Selling Policy. *bl 

L Clearing Arrangements. 162 

Administration of Justice. 163 

Pressure on Legislation. ib3 

The Revolt of August, 1943. 164 

Effect of German Occupation of Denmark on Iceland and Greenland. *64 

Iceland. 164 

Greenland...-. *67 






Administration. 169 

Finance. I( >9 

Deportations to Germany. x 7 ° 


y The Territorial Administrative Division. 17 1 

Alsace-Lorraine. 1 7 1 

The Occupied Zone. *73 

Administration. 1 73 

Punitive Functions of Military Commanders. 174 

Services and Labor. *75 

Economy and Finance. 1 75 

Books and Art. 1 7 ^ 

Resistance..*. *76 

Italian Zone. *77 

Vichy France. *78 

“ National Revolution . 1 78 

Delegation of Powers to Petain. 178 

Constitutional Acts. * 7 $ 

Ftihrer Principle. J 79 

Parliamentary Issues. 180 

Trial of Political Opponents. 180 

Corporative System and Labor. *8i 

Occupational families. 181 

Occupational unions (syndicats professionnels). 182 

Social committees for enterprises. 182 

Social committees for occupational families or occupations. 182 

Labor disputes. 1 83 

Other Labor Issues. *83 


Italian Occupation. *85 

Administration. *85 

Economy. *86 

Currency. *87 

Miscellanea. *87 

Bulgarian Occupation... *87 

Administration. 1 87 

Transfer of Population. 188 

Finance. *89 

German Occupation. * 9 ° 

The Area of the Greek Puppet Government. I 9 1 

Administration. I 9 I 

Finance. * 9 * 

Barter. I 9 I 

Feeding the Population. * 9 * 


Administration. *93 

Nazi Parties. *93 

Law and Courts. *94 

The Bar. 194 

Economy. 195 

Currency.•. x 95 

Labor. * 9 ^ 

Genocide. * 9 ^ 

Resistance. *97 





Background..... 198 

I ncorporation. 198 


German Administration.. 200 

Dutch Administration. 20$f 

Citizenship. 203 

Damages and Civil Claims. 203 

Finance. 204 

American Property. 205 

Resistance. 206 


The Invasion... 208 

Administration.... 210 

Attempts to Dethrone the King. 211 

Courts. 214 

The Attitude of the Norwegian Supreme Court. 214 

Annex 1. Correspondence between the Presidential Board of the Storting and the 

Norwegian Government. 215 

Annex 2. Correspondence between the Norwegian Supreme Court and the De¬ 
partment of Justice. 219 


Polish Incorporated Territories. 221 

Administration. 221 

The Legislative Setup. 222 

The Judiciary... 223 

Currency and Foreign Exchange. 223 

Sequestration and Confiscation. 223 

Economy and Taxation. 224 

The Government General. 225 

Administration. 225 

Courts. 226 

German Courts... 226 

Polish Courts. 227 

Sequestration of Private Property. 227 

Taxation and Economy. 227 

Education and Cultural Matters. 229 

Resistance. 230 

The Eastern Polish Territories. 231 


German and Rumanian Occupation). 232 

Administration.,. 232 

Property. 233 

The Joint-Farming Establishment (Gemeinwirtschaft) . 234 

The Farming Association ( Landbau-Genossenschaft ). 234 

Individual farms ( Einzelwirtschajt ). 234 

Labor.r..... 235 

Justice. 236 

Genocide and Resistance. 236 




Bessarabia, Bukovina, and Transnistria (Occupied and Incorporated by Rumania) 237 

Background... 237 

Political and Territorial Changes. 237 

“Rumanianization”. 237 

North Bukovina and Bessarabia. 238 

Transnistria. 239 


Background.. 241 

New Territorial Divisions. 243 

The Division of Slovenia. 243 

Lower Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola (German Occupation). 243 

Ljubljana (Italian Occupation). 245 

Dalmatia (Italian Occupation). 246 

Montenegro (Italian Occupation). 247 

Serbia (German Occupation). 248 

Administration. 248 

Law..... 248 

Property. .... 249 

Anti-Guerrilla Legislation. 249 

Genocide Legislation. 249 

Finance... 250 

The Banat (German Occupation). 251 

The State of Croatia. 252 

Establishment of the State. 252 

International Relations. r 252 

Council of State. 253 

Monoparty System. 254 

Church. 254 

Labor. 256 

Control of Trades.;. 256 

Courts. 257 

Penal Law. 257 

Property. 258 

Finance.. 258 

Genocide. 259 

Kossovo, Dibrano, and Struga (Albanian Occupation). 260 

Baranja, Backa, Prekomurje, and Medzumurje—Southern Territories (Hun¬ 
garian Occupation). 261 

Background. 261 

I ncorporation. 262 

Representation in Parliament. 262 

Administration. 262 

Citizenship. 263 

Currency.... 263 

Macedonia, Morava, Skoplje, and Bitolia Regions (Bulgarian Occupation).. 264 


Statutes, Decrees, and Other Documents 

ALBANIA....... . 267 

Union Acts and Basic Statute. 267 

Law No. 580 regarding Acceptance of the Crown of Albania by the King of 

Italy, Emperor of Ethiopia, April 16, 1939... 267 

Decree concerning the Basic Statute of the Kingdom of Albania, June 3, 1939 267 
Law No. 1115 regarding the Fusion of the Albanian Armed Forces with the Cor¬ 
responding Italian Armed Forces, July 13. 1939. 272 

Royal Decree No. 194 concerning Discipline of War, June 9, 1940. 272 




Albania —Continued 

Administration..... 273 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 43 concerning the Order for the Promotion and Ap¬ 
pointment of New State Employees, January 25, 1940. 273 

Royal Decree concerning Personnel on Mission in Albania, January 29, 1940. .. 273 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 163 concerning Employment of Counselors, July 16, 

1942... : . ,•••••• 274 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 176 concerning Regulations with respect to the Ap¬ 
pointment and Jurisdiction of Under Secretaries of State, November 4, 

„ . *942 . 274 

Fascination. 275 

Vicegerent’s Decree creating the Albanian Fascist Party, June 2, 1939. 275 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 73 concerning the Institution of the Central Council of 

Corporative Economy, March 14, 19.10. 277 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 101 concerning Attributions and Functioning of the 

Fascist Upper Corporative Council, April 3, 1940. 277 

Italian Propaganda. 278 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 114 concerning the Statute of the “Skanderbeg Foun¬ 
dation,” National Body for Cultural Growth in Albania, April 8, 1940. 278 

Italian Economic Control. 279 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 53 concerning Authorization of Operation for the 

S.A.C.I.A., February 14, 1940. 279 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 83 concerning the Covenant with the Italian Coal Co. 

(Azienda Carboni Italiani [A. Ca. I.]), March 14, 1940. 280 

Law. .. 281 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 228 concerning Crimes against the Personality of the 

State, January 6, 1940. 281 

Vicegerent's Decree No. 266 concerning New Members of the Provincial Com¬ 
mittee for Police Internment, October 23, 1942. 282 

Vicegerent's Decree No. 287 concerning Rules with respect to Persons Who 
Commit Acts Constituting a Menace to Public Safety on the Roads and to 
Telecommunications Service, November 13, 1942. 282 


Anschluss Acts. 283 

Law concerning the Reunion of Austria with the German Reich, March 13, 

193?... # . t .. 283 

Instruction of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Austrian 

Federal Army, March 13, 1938. 284 

Order pursuant to the Law concerning the Reunion of Austria with *the 

German Reich, March 16, 1938. 284 

Decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Appointment of 
the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the German 

Reich, April 23, 1938. 285 

Administration. 285 

Decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Austrian Provincial 

Government, March 15, 1938. 285 

Decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Administration of 

Oath to the Officials of the Province of Austria, March 15, 1938. 286 

Order for the Transfer of the Austrian National Bank to the Reichsbank, 

March 17, 1938. 287 

Order concerning the Establishment of a Reich Propaganda Office in Vienna, 

March 31, 1938. 287 

Law concerning the Reorganization of the Administration in the Ostmark, 

April 14, 1939. 288 

Law and Courts..:. 292 

First Decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Introduction 

of German Reich Law in Austria, March 15, 1938. 292 

Order concerning the Administration of Justice in Austria, March 22, 1938. . . 293 

Order concerning a Change in the Designation of Courts in the Province of 

Austria, August 2, 1938. 294 



Law concerning the Accountability of Members of the Former Austrian 
federal and Provincial Governments and Their Associates, August 17 

1938. . 

Order for the Further Adaptation of the Administration of Justice in the 
Province of Austria and in the Sudeten German Territories, February 28 

_ . 1939 .. 


Order concerning Preliminary Regulation of the Vocational School System in 
the Reich District of Sudetenland and in the Reich Districts of the Ost- 
mark, May 31, 1940. 

BALTIC STATES (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia). 


Proclamation of July 28, 1941. 

Order pursuant to the Assumption of the Administration by the Reich Com¬ 
missioner for the Ostland, August 18, 1941. 


Order concerning the Establishment and Organization of the German judiciary 

System in the Ostland, October 6, 1941. 


Order concerning the Sequestration of the Property of the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics in the Territory of the Reich Commissioner for the 

Ostland, August 19, 1941. 

Order concerning the Treatment of Jewish Property in the Reich Commissariat 

Ostland, October 13, 1941. 

Decree on the Reorganization of Handicrafts, Small Industry, and the Retail 

Trade, October 17, 1941. 

Regulations concerning the Administration of City Buildings and Houses, 

December 15, 1941.;.'. 


Regulation concerning remuneration to Jewish Labor in the General District of 
Latvia, March 19, 1942. 


Territories Incorporated into Germany 

Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Reunion of the 
Districts of Eupen, Malmedy, and Moresnet with the German Reich, Mav 

18, 1940. 

Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor for the Implementation of the Reunion 
of the Districts of Eupen, Malmedy, and Moresnet with the German Reich, 

May 23, 1940.’ 

Order concerning the Provisional Administration of Justice in the Districts of 

Eupen, Malmedy, and Moresnet, July 29, 1940. 

Act concerning the Representation of the German Nationals Resident in the 
Territories of Eupen, Malmedy, and Moresnet in the Greater German 

Reichstag, February 4, 1941. 

Decree concerning the Nationality of the Inhabitants of Eupen, Maim6dy, and 
Moresnet, September 23, 1941. 

Non-Incorporated Territories 


Proclamation to the Occupied Territory, May 10, 1940. ’[’*’** 

Order concerning the Application of German Penal Law and Statutes in the 
Territories of the Netherlands and Belgium Occupied by the German 

Armies, May 10, 1940. 

Ordinance concerning the Selling and Lending of Books and Pamphlets Hostile 

to Germany in Belgium, August 13, 1940. 

An Order Directed Against the Holding of Office by Over-Aged Persons in the 
public Administration of Belgium, March 7, 1941. 

















3 11 














Belgium —Continued 


Order concerning Sequestration in the Occupied Territories of the Netherlands, 

Belgium, Luxemburg, and France (Sequestration Order), May 20, J940.. 321 

Order concerning the Confiscation of Property by Way of Summary Order of 

Punishment, April 24, 1941. 3 2 3 

Economy.. -.... 3 2 3 

Order concerning the Organization of the National Economy, February 10, 

1941. 3 2 3 

Order concerning Factory Trustees, April 29, 1941. 3 2 5 

Order concerning an Audit of Enterprises, May 8, 1941. 326 

Order concerning the Surrender of Non-Ferrous Metals, October 20, 1941.... 327 

Finance. 3 2 9 

Order concerning Reich Credit Institutes, May 18, 1940. . .. 3 2 9 

Order Establishing a Supervisory Board for Banking in Belgium, June 14, 1940 333 

Order Establishing a Bank of Issue in Brussels, June 27, 1940.. 334 

Order concerning the Calling in and Retirement of Coins Issued by the Reich 

Credit Institutes, April 28, 19a 1.. 33^ 

Proclamation concerning the Establishment of a Clearing System for Payments 

to be made by Residents of Belgium and Denmark, January 21, 1942- 337 

Reparations. 33 $ 

Order concerning the Restitution of the Rights of Persons Persecuted in Bel¬ 
gium because of their Collaboration with the German Army of Occupation 

during the War 1914-1918, September 6, 1940... 338 

Order concerning the Enforcement of the Reparations Order, September 6, 

1940. 339 




An Act concerning the Administration of the Reich District Sudetenland, April 

14, 1939.. ;•••• 341 

Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia 

Administration... 34 2 

Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Protectorate of 

Bohemia and Moravia, March 16, 1939... 342 

Order concerning the Rate of Exchange in the Protectorate of Bohemia and 

Moravia, March 21, 1939.. 345 

An Act concerning the Representation in the Reichstag of Greater Germany of 
German Nationals Resident in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, 

April 13, 1939..... : . 34 6 

Order concerning the Acquisition of German Citizenship by Former Czecho¬ 
slovak Citizens of German Origin, April 20, 1939. .. 34^ 

Decree of the Fiihrer concerning the Administration in the Protectorate of 5 

Bohemia and Moravia, May 7, 1942. 347 

Law and Courts. 347 

Order concerning the Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction in the Protectorate of 

Bohemia and Moravia, April 14, 1939.• • •• •. 347 

Order concerning the Exercise of Jurisdiction in Civil Proceedings in the Pro¬ 
tectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, April 14, 1939. .. 349 

Order concerning the Exercise of Military Jurisdiction in the Protectorate of 

Bohemia and Moravia, May 8, 1939... 35 ° 

Order concerning the Authority to Promulgate Laws in the Protectorate of 

Bohemia and Moravia, June 7, 1939. 35 * 


Establishment of the State.... 35 2 

Law concerning the Sovereign State of Slovakia, March 14, 1939. 35 2 

Decree of the Government concerning the Establishment and Competence of 

the Individual Ministries of the State of Slovakia, March 15, 1939. 353 



Declaration concerning the German-Slovak Treaty of Protection concluded be¬ 
tween the German Reich and the State of Slovakia, March 24, 1939. • • • 
Treaty of Protection to be extended by the German Reich to the State of 


Political Parties v .•.. *’*[*’[’’* 

Law concerning Political Parties of Racial Groups, May 15, 1940. 

Law and Courts.'. 

Decree of the Government concerning Protective Custody for the Enemies of 

the State of Slovakia, March 24, 1939.*. 

Decree of the Government concerning the Establishment of a Slovakian 

Supreme Court, April 4, 1939. 

Constitutional Law concerning the Supreme Administrative Court, May 7, 

Decree of the Government concerning the Slovak National Bank, April 4, 1939 
Decree of the Government concerning Slovakian Currency, April 4, 1939. ..... 

Control of Property. 

Decree of the Government concerning the Establishment of Provisional Super¬ 
vision and Trusteeship of Large Estates, March 30, 1939. 

Decree of the Government concerning Those Gaining Wealth through Politics, 
April 24, 1939. 

The Highland Territories and Subcarpathia 

Reincorporation Laws... 

Law XXXIV of 1938 concerning the Reincorporation into the Country of the 
Highland Ierritories Returned to the Hungarian Holy Crown, November 

12, 1938.. 

Order No. 102,473/1939 B.M. of the Hungarian Royal Ministry of the Interior 
concerning the Territories to be Reincorporatcd as a Consequence of the 
Delimitation of the Hungarian-Czechoslovak Frontier and tne Extension 
of the Czechoslovak-Hungarian Amnesty Agreement, March 13, 1939. . . . 
Law VI of 1939 concerning the Union with the Country of the Carpathian Ter¬ 
ritories Reincorporated into the Hungarian Holy Crown, June 22, 1939. . 

Representation in Parliament... 

Law V of 1939 concerning Nomination of the Representatives of the Highland 
Territories Reincorporated into the Hungarian Holy Crown, to the House of 
Representatives of the Parliament Convoked for the 10th Day of the 

Month of June, 1939, June 22, 1939. 

Law XXI, 1942, concerning the Modification and Completion of Law XXII, 
1926, relating to the Upper House of Parliament, as well as concerning the 
Necessary Transitory Modifications in the Organization of the tJpper 
1 louse resulting from the Reincorporation of Territories, November 25,1942 


Decree No. 933 ?/i 93 « M.E. of the Hungarian Royal’ Cabinet concerning 
Administration of the Highland Territories Reincorporated into the 

Hungarian Holy Crown, December 18, 1938. 

Agrarian Reform. 

Order No. 2550/1939 of the Royal Hungarian Ministry, concerning the Trans¬ 
fer of Landed Estates in the Territories Reincorporatcd into the Hungarian 
Holy Crown, March 12, 1939. 


An Act concerning the Reunion of the Free City of Danzig with the German 
Reich, September 1, 1939. 


Proclamation of the German Commander in Copenhagen to the Danish Army 

and the Danish People, April 9, 1940.. 

Decree No. 337 concerning Importation and Exportation of Money and Securi¬ 
ties, et cetera, June 25, 1940. 































Den mark —Contin ued 

Law No. 415 amending Law No. 337 of June 25, 1940, concerning Importation 

and Exportation of Money and Securities, et cetera , October 2, 1941. 379 

Law No. 639 concerning the Sale of Merchandise to the Armed Forces and to 

Individual Members Thereof, December 11, 1940. 380 

Law No. 254 concerning the Prohibition of Certain Demonstrations, June 9, 1941. 381 

Law No. 349 concerning the Prohibition of Communistic Associations and Com¬ 
munistic Activities, August 22, 1941. 381 


Order concerning the Laws Applicable to the English Channel Islands, August 

23. 1940 . 384 

FRANCE. 385 


Regulation concerning Provisional Rearrangement of the Evangelical Church 

Organization in Lorraine, September 28, 1940. 385 

Order in regard to Private Schools, December 6, 1940.. 385 

Order concerning Compulsory Schooling in Lorraine (Compulsory Schooling 

Order), February 14, 1941. 386 

Regulation for Implementation of the Order concerning Compulsory Schooling, 

February 14, 1941. 386 

Order concerning the Elementary School System in Lorraine, February 14, 1941. 387 

Announcement for the Execution of the Order concerning the Elementary School 

System, February 14, 1941. 388 

Occupied France 

Administration. 389 

Announcement concerning General Orders Issued by the German Military 

Commanders, May 10, 1940. 389 

Order concerning the Withdrawal of French War Measures against German 
Property in France within the Jurisdiction of the German Military Gover¬ 
nor of Paris. 390 

Order concerning the Preservation of Works of Art in the Occupied Territory of 

France, July 15, 1940. 390 

Order concerning the Prohibition of the Use of Certain French Textbooks, 

August 10, 1940. 391 

Order against Unauthorized Crossing of the Frontiers and Military Barriers of 
the Occupied French Territory and concerning Export, Import, and Trans¬ 
port of Goods, April 28, 1941. 391 

Order for the Preservation of Labor Peace, November 6, 1941. 392 

Order concerning Medical Treatment for Members of the Armed Forces, Feb¬ 
ruary 5, 1942. 393 

Law and Courts........... 393 

Order concerning the Administration of Justice in the Occupied Territory, 

July 23, 1940. 393 

Order concerning the Authority of the District Commanders in the Occupied 
Territory of France to Exercise Summary Penal Jurisdiction, September 

10,1940.’•. 394 

Order concerning Protection against Acts of Sabotage, October 10, 1940. 395 

Economy and Finance. 396 

Second Order concerning Provisional Regulation of Monetary Exchange be¬ 
tween the Occupied French Territory and the Reich and Foreign Countries 
respectively (Second Provisional Foreign Exchange Order), August 14, 

194 °. 396 

Order concerning the Contribution of Goods and Services, January 31, 1942.. 398 

Order concerning the Suspension of Enterprises, February 25, 1942. 398 



Genocide Legislation.. 

Order concerning Measures against the Jews, September 27, 1940. 

Second Order concerning Measures against Jews, October 18, 1940. 

Sixth Order concerning Measures against Jews, February 7, 1942. 

Italian Zone 

Law concerning Provisions for the Administration of Justice in the Metropolitan 
Enemy Territories in the West Occupied by the Armed Forces and for the Ex¬ 
tension of Customs Laws to Those Territories, December 5, 1940. 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism establishing Regulations in regard to the 
Issue of Academic Diplomas in the Occupied brencli Territory, May 22, 1941 
Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism establishing Regulations in regard to the 
Rate of Exchange between the Lira and the French Franc in the French 
Territory Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, June 21, 1941. 


Constitutional Laws. 

Constitutional Law, July 10, 1940. 

Constitutional Act No. 1, July ii, 1940. 

Constitutional Act No. 2, Defining the Authority of the Chief of the French 

State, July II, 1940. 

Constitutional Act No. 7, January 27, 1941. 


Law concerning the Social Organization of Occupations, October 4, 1941. 

Law No. 439 concerning the Institution of a “National Order of Labor,” 
April 1, 1942. 


* . 

Italian Occupation 

Proclamation No. 2 of the High Commander of the Troops in Albania, October 

28, 1940. 

Proclamation No. 10 of the High Commander of the Troops in Albania, October 

28, 1940. 

Proclamation No. 6 of the High Commander of the Troops in Albania, October 

29, 1940. # . 

Proclamation No. 7 of the High Commander of the Troops in Albania, October 

30, 1940. ; .... 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism on Regulations concerning Monopoly Serv¬ 
ices in the Territories Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, May 4, 1941.... 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism concerning Regulations with respect to the 
Rate of Exchange of the Italian Lira, the Albanian Franc, and the Drachma 
in the Greek Territory Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, June 21, 1941 
Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism 011 Measures regarding the Civil Adminis¬ 
tration of the Territory of the Greek Peninsula Occupied by Detachments of 
the High Command of the Armed Forces in Albania, July 2, 1941. 

Bulgarian Occupation 

Decree concerning Land Grants for Municipal Officials in the Villages of the 
Aegean Region, Approved by the 34th Decision of the Council of Ministers 

Taken at the Session of October 9, 1942, Protocol No. 131. 

Decree regarding the Construction, and Justification of Expenditures for the Con¬ 
struction, of Dwelling-houses for the Colonists in the Aegean Region, Ap¬ 
proved by the 36th Decision of the Council of Ministers Taken at the Session 
of October 14, 1942, Protocol No. 133. 



Order concerning Certain Changes of the Right to Vote, October 17, 1940_ 































Luxemburg —Continued 

Order concerning the Dissolution of the Chamber of Deputies and the Council 

of State in Luxemburg, October 22, 1940. 

Order concerning the Administration of Municipalities and other Subdivisions 

of Government in Luxemburg, November 14, 1940. 

Law and Courts.". 

Order concerning the Preliminary Establishment of a German CriminaVCourt 

in Luxemburg, August 20, 1940. 

Order concerning Transactions in Real Estate in Luxemburg, August 28, 1940. 
Order concerning the Provisional Organization of the Law Courts in Luxemburg, 

November 9, 1940. 

Order concerning Legal Education and Examination and Admission to the Bar, 

December 6, 1940. 

Order concerning Insidious Attacks on the Party and the Movement, January 

15, 194*. 

Order concerning the Establishment of a Special Honor Court for Attorneys 

in Luxemburg, February 12, 1941. 

Order concerning Certain Changes of Family Law, March 22, 1941. 


Order concerning the Appointment of a Commissioner for the Restriction and 

Control of Private Organization in Luxemburg, August 28, 1940.. 

Order concerning the Establishment of Prices on and after October 1, 1940, 

September 30, 1940.. 

Order concerning the Control of the Supply of Iron and Steel, October 31, 1940. 
Order to Insure the Organic Structure of Economic Life in Luxemburg, Novem¬ 
ber 12, 1940. 

Order for the Protection of the Economy ofLuxemburg, November 21, 1940... 
Order concerning Certain Measures Affecting Economic Life, February 21 



Order concerning the Designation of the Reichsmark as Legal Tender in Luxem¬ 
burg, August 26, 1940. 

Proclamation concerning the Calling in and Surrender of Foreign Exchange of 

September 13, 1940. 

Order concerning the Calling in and Withdrawal from Circulation of Belgian 
and Luxemburg Francs and of Reich Credit Institute Notes in Luxem¬ 
burg, January 29, 1941. 


Order concerning the Issuance of Work Books in Luxemburg, September 30, 


Proclamation concerning Entry into the Reich Labor Service, February 12, 



Order concerning Withdrawal from Religious Congregations, December 9, 1940 
Order for the Preservation of Freedom of Religious Belief, December 9, 1940. . 

Genocide Legislation. 

Order concerning the Use of the German Language in Luxemburg, August 6, 


Proclamation in connection with the Order concerning the Use of the German 

Language, September 14, 1940. 

Order concerning the Change of hirst and Family Names in Luxemburg, 

January 31, 1941. 

Duty of Registration for All Persons Engaged in Creating or Transmitting Cul¬ 
tural Values in Luxemburg. 


Law concerning the Reunion of the Memelland with the German Reich, March 

23, *939-... 

Decree concerning the Introduction of German Currency in the Territory of 
Mernel, March 23, 1939. 








































Administration. 446 

Decree of the Fiihrer concerning the Exercise of Governmental Authority in 

the Netherlands, May 18, 1940. 446 

Proclamation of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories to the Netherlands Population, May 25, 1940. 447 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Exercise of Governmental Authority in the Netherlands, 

May 29, 1940. 448 

Decree of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Organization and Establishment of the Office of the Reich 

Commissioner, June 3, 1940. 450 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Entry and Departure of Persons into and from the Nether¬ 
lands Territories, June 6, 1940. 452 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Authority of the Secretaries General of the Several Nether¬ 
lands Ministries, June 21, 1940. 453 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Functions of the Council of State and Several Representa¬ 
tive Agencies of Public Law, June 21, 1940. 453 

Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice for the Safeguarding 

of the Economic Independence of the Press, August 17, 1940. 454 

Fourth Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories concerning Certain Administrative Measures, August 20, 1940. . . . 455 

Order of the Secretaries General of the Ministries of the Interior and Justice 

concerning the Duty of Identification, September 6, 1940. 456 

Order of the Secretaries General of the Ministries of Social Welfare and the 
Interior Establishing an Insurance Fund for Accidents Arising out of Air 

Raid Defense Activities, January 3, 1941.'. 457 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Personal Status of German Nationals in the Occupied 

Netherlands Territories, February 28, 1941. 458 

First Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories concerning Extraordinary Measures of a Constitutional and Ad¬ 
ministrative Nature, March 1, 1941. 458 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 

concerning the Dissolution of Parliamentary Parties, July 4, 1941. 459 

Third Order 01 the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories concerning Certain Provisions in Connection with Netherlands Na¬ 
tionality, August 8, 1941. 460 

Eighth Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories concerning Special Measures Affecting Administrative Organization, 

August 11, 1941.... 461 

Order of the Secretaries General of the Ministries of Justice and Social Welfare 

concerning the Control of Prostitutes, September 15, 1941. 464 

Law, Courts, and Lawyers. 465 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Jurisdiction of Courts of the German Armed Forces, June 

8,1940..... . 465 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Jurisdiction of German Courts in Criminal Proceedings, 

July 17, 1940. 466 

First Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri¬ 
tories concerning Certain Measures relating to Civil Claims, December 

19, 1940. 47! 

Decree of the Fiihrer concerning the Grant of Pardons in the Occupied Nether¬ 
lands Territories, December 20, 1940. 472 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 

concerning the Right of Pardon, January 6, 1941. 472 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Indemnification of German Nationals for Damages to 
Property Suffered as a Result of the War, February 7, 1941. 473 



Netherlands —Continued 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning Marriages of Male Persons of German Nationality in the Oc- 
cupied 1 Netherlands Territories, and Related Matters, February 28, 1941 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Establishment of Administrative Courts Martial March 10 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied’ Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Sale of Enterprises and Factories to Aliens, March 24, 1941 

ur<Jer ol the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
Property COnCernm ^ DefenSe A S ainst Acts of Sabotage, October 16, 1941. 

General Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Terri- 
tones concerning the Confiscation of Property, Julv 4, 1940. 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Alienation of Real Property Owned by the State and the 
Conclusion of Settlements of Disputes Involving Real Property Owned 

by the State, October 4, 1940. 


First Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Social Welfare,' I mole- 
menting Order No. 8/1940 of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied 
Netherlands I emtones concerning Restriction of Industrial Operations, 
June II, 1940. 1 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netheriands Territories 
concerning the I ransportation of Persons and Goods, June 17, 1940. 

Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Ship- 
concerning the Rationing of Special Gasoline, June 17, 1940. 

First Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Waterstaat Imple- 
menting Order No. 15/1940 of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied 
Netherlands I erntories concerning the Transportation of Persons and 
Goods, June 18, 1940. 

Second Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Waterstaat Imple- 
menting Order No. 15/1940 of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied 
Netherlands I erntories concerning the Transportation of Persons and 
Goods, June 18, 1940. 

Third Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Waterstaat Imple¬ 
menting Order No. 15/1940 of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied 
Netherlands I erntories concerning the Transportation of Persons and 
Goods, June 18, 1940. 

Order of the Secretary General of the Ministries of Trade, Industry, and Ship¬ 
ping, and Agriculture and Fisheries, concerning Prohibition of Price In¬ 
creases (Price Fixing Order 1940, No. 1), July 11, 1940. 

Older of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries 
concerning the Authority of the Director General for the Food Supply and 
the Establishment of a Commission to Secure the Food Supply, Septem¬ 
ber 10, 1940. 

Order of the Secretaries General in the Ministries of Trade, Industry and Ship- 
Ping, Agriculture and Fisheries, Waterstaat, the Interior, Finance, Social 
Wellare, and Justice, concerning the Appointment of a Price Commis¬ 
sioner, November n, 1940. 

Order of the Secretaries General in the Ministries of Finance, and Trade, In¬ 
dustry, and Shipping, concerning the Levy of Customs Duties on the Im- 
portation of German Goods, December 16, 1940. . 


Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netheriands Territories 
concerning the Establishment of a Reconstruction Fund, June 21, 1940.. 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
Changing the Rate of Exchange of the Reich Credit Institute Notes and 
the Gulden, July 16, 1940. 

Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Finance concerning the Reg¬ 
istration of Foreign Exchange, September 18, 1940. 





47 # 




















Order of the Secretaries General of the Ministries of Trade, Industry and 
Shipping, and Finance, concerning Aid to Firms Experiencing Difficulties 

in Maintaining Their Liquidity, October io, 1940. 489 

Order of the Secretaries General in the Ministries of Finance, Justice, Trade, 
Industry and Shipping, Agriculture and Fisheries, and the Colonies, 
concerning Foreign Exchange Control (Foreign Exchange Order 1941), 

March 26, 1941.. 490 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
Amending Order No. 48/1940 concerning the Change of Rate of Exchange 

of Reich Credit Institute Notes and the Gulden, April 23, 1941. 492 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 
concerning the Registration of Assets of the United States, its Citizens and 

Certain Other Persons, September II, 1941. 492 

Labor. 494 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 

concerning the Netherlands Reconstruction Service, July 30, 1940. 494 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 

Prohibiting Reduction in Wages and Salaries, August 27, 1940. 495 

Order of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Social Welfare concerning 

Employment Service, September 24, 1940. 495 

Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands Territories 

to Insure Labor Peace, May 19, 1941. 49 ^ 

NORWAY. 498 

Administration. 498 

Decree of the Fiihrer concerning the Exercise of Governmental Authority in 

Norway, April 24, 1940. 498 

Order Prohibiting Political Parties in Norway, September 25, 1940. 499 

Order concerning the Dismissal and Transfer of Officials, October 7, 1940. . . . 499 

Order concerning the Prohibition of Activities on Behalf of the Royal House of 

Norway, October 7, 1940. 5 °° 

Law and Courts. 5 QI 

Order concerning Procedure before the German Court, August 27, 1940. 501 

Order concerning the Establishment of a Norwegian Special Court, October 

25,1940. 5^3 

Law concerning Postponement of Foreclosure Sales in respect to Volunteers 

for War Service, February 26, 1942. 503 

Genocide Legislation. 5°4 

Order concerning the Subsidizing of Children Begotten by Members of the Ger¬ 
man Armed Forces in Occupied Territories, July 28, 1942. 504 

POLAND. 506 

Incorporated Territories 

Administration. 5 °b 

Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Organization and 

Administration of the Eastern Territories, October 8, 1939. 506 

Second Order for the Enforcement of the Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chan¬ 
cellor concerning the Organization and Administration of the Eastern 

Territories, November 2, 1939. 5°7 

Decree concerning the Introduction of Military Law in the Incorporated 

Eastern Territories, April 30, 1940.5°8 

Order concerning the Organization and Administration of the Eastern Terri¬ 
tories, May 31, 1941. 5°9 

Second Order Implementing the Act for the Protection of German Blood and 

German Honor, May 31, 1941. 5°9 

Law and Courts. ; .... . .. 0 10 

Order concerning Organization of Courts in the Incorporated Eastern Terri¬ 
tories, June 13, 1940. 5 10 



Poland —Contin tied 


Decree concerning the Treatment of the Property of Citizens of the Former 

Polish State. September 17, 1940. 

Taxation .’ 

Order concerning Tax Abatement for the Benefit of the Incorporated Eastern 

Territories (Eastern Tax Abatement Order), December 9, 1940. 

Economy and Finance.'... 

Order concerning the Introduction of the Four-Year Plan in the Eastern Terri¬ 
tories, October 30, 1939. 

Order concerning the Introduction of Reichsmark Currency in the Incorpo¬ 
rated Eastern Territories, November 22, 1939. 

Second Order for the Introduction of the Four-Year Plan in the Annexed East¬ 
ern Territories, July 9, 1940. 

Government General 


Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Administration of 

the Occupied Polish Territories, October 12, 1939. 

Proclamation of the Governor General, October 26/1030. . 

Law and Courts... 

Decree concerning German Jurisdiction in the Government General, Febru¬ 
ary 19, 1940. 

Order concerning Polish Jurisdiction in the Government General, February 19, 

r 1940 . 

Decree concerning German Advocates in the Government General, September 

„ 13.1940 ... 


Decree concerning Sequestration of Private Property in the Government 

General, January 24, 1940. . . 


Order Establishing a Planning Board for Chemical Products within the Gov¬ 
ernment General, April 9, 1941. 


Decree concerning the Bank of Issue in Poland, December 15, 1939. . . * ’. . . *. 

Decree concerning Industrial Tax (Registration Fee), February 14, 1940. 

Decree concerning the Increase of Property Tax for the Fiscal Year 1940, 

March 16, 1940. 

Decree concerning the Imposition of a Head Tax, June 27, 1940. 

Order concerning the Establishment of the Budget of the Government General 

for the Fiscal Year 1940, March 3, 1941. 


Decree concerning the Introduction of Compulsory Labor for the Polish Popula¬ 
tion of the Government General, October 28, 1939. 

Order concerning the Determination of Working Conditions and the Protec¬ 
tion of Labor in the Government General, October 31, 1939. 

Order concerning the Introduction of Wage Scales for Craftsmen in the Public 

Service, November 23, 1939. 

Second Order Implementing the Order of October 26, 1939: concerning the 
Introduction of Forced Labor for the Jewish Population of the Govern¬ 
ment General, December 12, 1939. 

Decree concerning the Extension of Compulsory Labor for the Population of the 

Government General, December 14, 1939. 

Order concerning the Payment of Unemployment Relief, December 16, 1939.. 
Order concerning the Restriction of the Right to Change Employment, Feb¬ 
ruary 22, 1940. 

Second Order concerning Social Security in the Government General (Bene¬ 
fits and Procedure), March 7, 1940. 

Order Changing Regulations for the Protection of Labor, June 13, 1940. 

Order concerning the Introduction of a Work Card in the Government General, ’ 
December 20, 1940. 


5 ii 

5 ii 















53 i 





















Wage Scale for Male and Female Workers in Forest Industry (Wage Scale 

Register No. 12/i), February 7, 1941. 550 

Order concerning the Distribution of Labor Forces, Employment Service, 
Occupation Guidance, and Apprenticeship Placement Service, February 

„ 20, 1941.. 551 

Genocide Legislation.... 552 

Order concerning the Introduction of a Certificate for Persons of German Origin 

in the Government General, October 29, 1941. 552 

Order concerning the Granting of Child Subsidies to Germans in the Govern¬ 
ment General, March 10, 1942. 553 

Miscellaneous. . . .. 555 

Order concerning Prohibition of Dancing in the Government General, April 9, 

x 94 *. 555 


Proclamation, November 15, 1941. 556 

Decree concerning the Conditions of Employment of Eastern Workers, June 30, 

x 942 . 556 

Bessarabia and Bukovina 

Decree-Law for the Creation of a National Center for Rumanianization, May 2, 

1941..... .... ..< . 563 

Proclamation by the Presidency of the Council of Ministers concerning the Return 
of Refugees and Entry on the Territory of Bessarabia and Bukovina, July 
25 . 1941 . 565 

Transnistria . 565 

Decree-Law concerning Ownership of Goods Left by the Retreating Enemy, and 
concerning Introduction of Capital Punishment for Certain Offenses Com¬ 
mitted Behind the Lines or on the Territory Reoccupied by the Armies on the 

Rumanian-Russian Front, July 9, 1941. 565 

Decree-Law No. 252 concerning the Prohibition of Use of Secret Mail in Trans¬ 
nistria, March 28, 1942. 566 

Decree-Law No. 698 for the Institution of the Death Penalty for Jews Who Were 
Sent to Transnistria and Who Have Returned Fraudulently to this Country, 
September 19, 1942. 567 


Italian Laws of Occupation before the Division of Yugoslavia 

Administration and Judiciary. 569 

Proclamation of the Duce on Measures concerning the Administration of Jus¬ 
tice in the Territories Formerly Forming Part of the Yugoslav State and 

Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, April 24, 1941. 569 

Proclamation of the Duce on Authority to Appoint Extraordinary Commission¬ 
ers for the Navigation Associations in the Territories of the Former King¬ 
dom of Yugoslavia Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, May 6, 1941. . 569 

Proclamation of the Duce on Administrative and Judiciary Organization in the 
Territory of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia Occupied by the Italian 

Armed Forces, May 17, 1941. 570 

Customs. 573 

Proclamation of the Duce on Regulations in regard to Customs in the Terri¬ 
tories of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia Oc£bpied by the Italian Armed 

Forces, April 29, 1941... 573 

Royal Decree-Law No. 290 concerning Provisions in regard to Customs for 
Shipments of Goods between the Territories of the Italo-Albanian Cus¬ 
toms Union and Those of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia Occupied by 

the Italian Armed Forces, April 30, 1941. 575 

Proclamation of the Duce on Regulations concerning the Control of Imports 
into the Territories of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia occupied by 
the Italian Armed Forces, May 17, 1941. 576 




Y ugoslavia —Continued 

Finance..... 577 

Proclamation of the Duce on Regulations concerning Payments to be Made in 

the Occupied Yugoslav Territory, April 16, 1941. 577 

Proclamation of the Duce on Regulations concerning Exchange and Currency 
in the Territories of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia Occupied by the 

Italian Armed Forces, April 24, 1941. 577 

Ministerial Decree concerning Regulations for Monetary Relations between 
the Territory of the Italian State and the Territories of the Former King¬ 
dom of Yugoslavia Occupied by the Italian Armed Forces, as well as for 
the Introduction into Italy of Stocks, Bonds, and Securities, April 25, 


Lower Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola (German Occupation) 

Order concerning Money and Credit Institutions in Lower Styria, May 19, 1941 582 

First Implementary Order to the Order concerning Money and Credit Institu¬ 
tions in Lower Styria, June 5, 1941. 583 

20th Decree regarding tne Introduction of Reichsmark Currency and the With¬ 
drawal from Circulation of the Dinar and the “ Reichskreditkassenscheine” in 
the Occupied Territories of Carinthia and Carniola, May 23, 1941. 583 

Ljubljana (Italian Occupation) 

Royal Decree-Law No. 291 concerning Establishment of the Province of Ljublj¬ 
ana, May 3, 1941... ...... 5^4 

Royal Decree-Law No. 415 concerning Establishment of Monopoly Services in 

the Province of Ljubljana, May 19, 1941. 585 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism concerning Jurisdiction within the Terri¬ 
tory of the Former Kingdom of Yugoslavia Occupied by the Italian Armed 

Forces, June 2, 1941. 586 

Royal Decree-Law No. 454, concerning Maintenance in Effect in the Province 
of Ljubljana of the Regulations Issued by the Italian Occupation Authorities, 

June 7, 1941.. 586 

Dalmatia (Italian Occupation) 

Royal Decree-Law No. 452, concerning Organization of the Territories Which 

Have Become an Integral Part of the Kingdom of Italy, May 18, 1941. 587 

Royal Decree No. 453, concerning Territorial Boundaries of the Provinces of 
Zara, Spalato, and Cattaro, and Functions of the Governor of Dalmatia, 

June 7, 1941. 588 

Montenegro (Italian Occupation) 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism on Regulations concerning the Authority of 

the High Commissioner for the Territory of Montenegro, June 19, 1941- 589 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism concerning the Establishment of a Gover¬ 
norship of Montenegro, October 3, 1941. 590 

Serbia (German Occupation) 

Administration. 591 

Proclamation to the Occupied Yugoslav Territory, April, 1941. 591 

Order Establishing the Duty of Registration for Printing and Multigraphing 

Apparatus, May 9, 1941. 592 

Order concerning the Press in the Serbian Territories, May 20, 1941. 593 

Order concerning the Operation of Theaters, May 20, 1941. 595 

Order concerning the Operation of Cabarets and Vaudeville Houses, May 21, 

1941 . 596 

Law and Courts. 597 

Order concerning the Application of German Criminal Law and Criminal Stat¬ 
utes in the Occupied Yugoslav Territories. 597 

Order concerning the Confiscation of Property for Activities Hostile to the 

State, December 22, 1941. 598 



Economy and Finance..... 

Order concerning the Resumption of Production, May 12, 1941. 

Decree concerning Central Banking in Serbia, May 29, 1941. 

Order concerning the Reich Credit Institutes. 

Genocide Legislation. •••••• -;-- --:. 

Order concerning the Sheltering of Jews, December 22, 1941. 

Anti-Guerrilla Legislation ...... .......... -• • • .. 

Order concerning the Harvesting of the Corn Crop, October 9, 194 1 

The Banat (German Occupation) 

Ordinance concerning the Internal Administration of the Banat. 










Establishment of the State and Its Administration. 606 

Order, April u, 1941.... • • ■ • • •• •••••' . bob 

Decree concerning the Appointment of the First Croatian National Govern¬ 
ment, April 16, 1941 .1 . ••••••••; -*.-r.* V 'r 'r ’i*" 606 

Law concerning the Eastern Frontier of the Independent State of Croatia, ^ 

Decree concerning the Establishment of a Council of State, January 24, 1942* • bo8 
Law concerning Chambers and Professional Associations, April 18, 1942. 009 

^ ^^Regulations concerning the Objectives, Organization, Work and Direction of 

“Ustase,” the Croatian Liberation Movement, August II, I 94 2 . bI1 

Law and Courts.....: • • .. 

Law-Decree on Protection of the Nation and the State, April 17, 194 *••-- 61 3 

Law concerning the Establishment of the Supreme Court and of the Offices of 
Attorney General in Bania Luca and State Attorneys in Zagreb and Sara¬ 
jevo; and concerning the Abolition of the Bench of Seven (Supreme Court) 
and of the Office of Attorney General in Zagreb, and of the Supreme Court 

and Attorney General in Sarajevo, January 7, 1942. . . ..• ...... • • • 614 

Law concerning Suppression of Violent Crimes Against the State, Individuals, 

and Property, July 20, I 94 2 - • --- • ....• * 61 5 

Law concerning Loss of Citizenship and State Nationality by I ersons who 
Emigrated from or Left the Independent State of Croatia, August 10, 

church 1942 . £* 

Law concerning the Croatian Eastern Orthodox Church, April 3, I 94 2 . ^*7 

Statute concerning the Croatian Eastern Orthodox Church, June 5, 1942- 617 

Property. 620 

Decree-Law concerning the Transfer and Mortgaging of Real Estate, April 18, 

jg.j . 020 

I aw concerning Expropriation of Productive Establishments, August 2, 1941 • • 620 

Law concerning Investigation of the Original Property and concerning the 

Forfeiture of Property Illegally Acquired, August 30, 1941. ° 2 * 

Decree-Law concerning the Establishment of the Croatian State Bank, May io, 

. 022 

Decree-Law concerning Currency of the Independent State of Croatia, July 7, 

1941 . 

Statute of the Croatian Union of Workers, January 23, 1942. 623 

Law Regulating Labor Relations, April 30, 1942. b2 4 

Genocide Legislation. . — • • •: — * * * *' * ' \« >2 ^ 

Decree-Law concerning the Preservation of Croatian National I roperty, April ^ ^ 

Law concerning Prohibition of the Cyrillic Alphabet, April 25* 194 *. ^? 2 ^ 

Law concerning Nationality, April 30, 1941. 02b 

Kossovo, Dibrano, and StRUGA (Albanian Occupation) 

Proclamation of the Duce of Fascism concerning the Exercise of Civil Authority 

in Kossovo, Dibrano, and Struga, June 29, 1941. 62 7 



Y ugoslavia— Continued 


Vicegerent s Decree No. 317 concerning the Extension of Laws and Decrees to the 
Secondary Schools Annexed to the Kingdom of Albania, November 12, 1041 
Vicegerent s Decree No. 165 concerning the Instution of Public Works Offices in 

Redeemed territories, July22, 1942. 

Law No. 264 concerning Conversion into Law* of Decree-Law'NoV 264'(1041) 
September 12, 1942. * 

Vicegerent’s Decree No 282 concerning Extension of the Law of August 29! 1*930, 
to the Redeemed rerntories, October 2, 1942.; ..... 

Baranja, BaCka, Prekomurje, and Mediumurje (Hungarian Occupation) 

Law XX 1941, concerning the Reincorporation of the Recovered Southern Terri¬ 
tories into the Hungarian Holy Crown and their Unification with the Coun¬ 
try, December 27, 1941. 

Macedonia, Morava, Skoplje, and Bitolia Regions (Bulgarian Occu¬ 
pation) • 

Decision of the Council of Ministers, No. 2012, May 26, 1941.... 

Decision of the Council of Ministers, No. 3121, August 1, 1941! 1 !!!*.!!!!!!!! 1 








APPENDIX. Convention respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land 
Signed at The Hague, October 18, 1907. 









During the present war and during the period immediately preceding the 
war the European Axis Powers comprising Germany, Italy, Hungary, Bul¬ 
garia, and Rumania have, by means of duress and force, either occupied or 
occupied and then incorporated into their own territory a large part of 
Europe. Moreover, by assuming the rdle of supreme arbiters in European 
territorial problems, Germany and Italy have determined territorial changes 
in Central and Southeastern Europe. Thus the Axis has occupied or other¬ 
wise disposed of the countries indicated in the following paragraphs. 1 

Germany, in the course of the present war, has occupied Poland, Danzig, 
Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, France, English 
Channel Islands, Yugoslavia, Greece, the Baltic States, and parts of Russia, 
and in several instances has followed the occupation by incorporation of 
parts of the occupied territory into the Reich. Previously, by bloodless war, 
Germany had occupied and annexed Austria, and then the Sudeten (belong¬ 
ing theretofore to Czechoslovakia); later it completed the dismemberment of 
Czechoslovakia by creating the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia and 
the separate state of Slovakia. In March, 1939, Memel Territory was 
ceded to Germany by Lithuania under pressure and was incorporated into 
the Reich. 

Italy , following the armistice with France of June 24, 1940, occupied the 
Mentone district; and later on, in the course of the occupation of all France 
in November, 1942, the Italian occupation was extended to the Rhone valley 
and to Haute-Savoie. After the downfall of Mussolini in July, 1943, 
Italian zone of occupation in France was taken over by Germany. In 1941, 
after the Greek resistance was crushed by Germany, Italy, which had waged 
an unsuccessful war against Greece since October, 1940, occupied north¬ 
western parts of Greece, the Ionian Islands, Corfu, and part of Crete. The 
Albanians were permitted to occupy the provinces of Yanina, Thesprotia, 
and Prenza. Fluctuations in the military situation led to frequent changes 
as between the German and Italian occupation forces. Following the down¬ 
fall of Mussolini, however, all the Italian-held areas were taken over by 
Germany and Bulgaria. After the invasion of Yugoslavia in 1941, Italy had 
occupied the province of Ljubljana and Dalmatia, later annexing them, and 
had occupied Montenegro. Previously, in April, 1939, Italy had occu- 

1 For fuller details, see below, Part I, “Administration,” and the respective countries, 
in Part II. .... . . 

The r6le of Finland as an occupant being insignificant, the author does not deal with Fin¬ 
nish material in this work. 




pied Albania and created a union between the two states. Following the 
dismemberment of Yugoslavia, Albania, which was under the control of the 
Italian vicegerent, occupied parts of Yugoslavia, namely, Kossovo, Dibrano, 
and Struga. 

Hungary occupied the following Czechoslovak territories: the southern 
part of these territories, called by the Hungarians the Highland Regions, was 
occupied in November, 1938, and March, 1939; and Subcarpathia was oc¬ 
cupied in March, 1939. After the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, Hungary 
occupied the Yugoslav territories of Prekomurje, Medzumurje, and the 
provinces of Baranja and Ba£ka in the Voivodina region. In addition, in 
accordance with the German-Italian arbitration award of August 30, 1940, 
the northern part of Transylvania, belonging theretofore to Rumania, was 
occupied by Hungary. All of these territories were subsequently incor¬ 
porated into Hungary. 

Bulgaria has occupied, in the course of the war against Greece, Eastern 
Macedonia, the Aegean region of Thrace, and the islands of Thasos and 
Samothrace. Previously, following the treaty with Rumania of September 
7, 1940, Bulgaria had occupied Southern Dobruja, which was taken from 
Bulgaria and given to Rumania by the Treaty of Neuilly in 1919. After the 
dismemberment of Yugoslavia, Bulgaria occupied Western Macedonia, the 
Skoplje and Bitolia regions, and part of the Yugoslav province of Morava. 

Rumania has occupied, during the war against Russia, Bukovina and Bes¬ 
sarabia, which it had ceded to Russia at the latter’s request in June, 1940. 
In addition, Rumania has occupied the territory between the eastern border 
of Bessarabia and the lower Bug, with the main city of Odessa, which area 
is now called Transnistria. 

On the territories of the dismembered Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia 
there were established two new states—Slovakia, under the protection of 
Germany, and Croatia, initially under the protection of Italy but actually 
always under predominant control by Germany. For strategic reasons 
Germany holds under military occupation certain areas within the bound¬ 
aries of these puppet states, for example, a western portion of Slovakia and 
the Zemun area in Croatia. 





I. The Administrative Territorial Units 

As stated above, Germany has occupied the following countries during the 
present war: Poland, Danzig, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, 
Luxemburg, France, English Channel Islands, Yugoslavia, Greece, the Baltic 
States, and parts of Russia. Previously, by bloodless war, Germany oc¬ 
cupied Austria, on March 9, 1938, the Sudeten, on October 1, 1938, and the 
remainder of Czechoslovakia, on March 15, 1939 - Memel Territory was 
ceded by Lithuania to Germany by treaty of March 22, 1939. 

1. Incorporated A reas. Some of these territories occupied before the war 
and in the course of military operations were expressly incorporated into 
Germany, those so incorporated being Austria, the Sudeten, Danzig, the 
Polish provinces—Posen, Upper Silesia, Teshen, Pomerania, L6dz (now 
Litzmannstadt), Ciechandw, Suwalki, Bialystok; the Belgian districts 
Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet; and the northern Yugoslav provinces of 
Carniola, Carinthia, and Lower Styria. Memel, also, was incorporated 
into the Reich. Other territories—Alsace-Lorraine, Luxemburg—were at¬ 
tached to the Reich by including them within the German customs frontier, 
by making them separate parts of the German districts ( Gaue ), and by 
introducing into these areas political institutions of the Greater Reich. 

2. Non-incorporated Areas. The non-incorporated territories include the 
following territorial units: the central and southern part of Poland, which 
is administered as the Government General, with headquarters in Cracow; 
and the territories occupied in the present Russo-German war, which are 
under the administration of Rosenberg, Reich Minister for the Territories 
Occupied in the East. The Reich Ministry for these latter areas has created 
the following subdivisions: (a) the Reich Commissariat for Ostland, and ( b) 
the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine. The Reich Commissariat for 
Ostland consists of four general commissariats, namely, a general commis¬ 
sariat for Estonia (headquarters in Tallinn), for Latvia (headquarters in 
Riga), for Lithuania (headquarters in Kaunas), and for White Russia (head¬ 
quarters in Minsk). The General Commissariat for White Russia com¬ 
prises the eastern Polish territories occupied by Russia in September, 1939 * 
and Russian territories to the northeast of the Polish frontier. Ihe Reich 
Commissariat for the Ukraine consists of Ukraine proper, the whole of the 
Polish province of Wolhynia, and the southern part of the Polish province 
of Polesie. 




Besides the above-mentioned territorial divisions, four of the countries 
occupied in the west—Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium (ex¬ 
cluding Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet)—are administered within their 
original boundaries. 

The non-incorporated German-held part of France was divided into four 
zones: (i) Northern France and Pas de Calais, under the German com¬ 
mander in Brussels, which we shall call the northern zone; (2) the central 
western zone delimited in the south and southwest by the German-French 
armistice agreement; (3) the so-called Vichy zone; (4) the prohibited zone 
along the coastal line, which has a special regime of military control because 
of the fortifications built there. 

Czechoslovakia, in addition to the loss of the Sudetenland, has undergone 
the following partition: Bohemia and Moravia were occupied by the German 
forces and form the so-called Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia; and the 
third part of Czechoslovakia was erected as a separate state under the name 
of Slovakia and was put under the protection of Germany. 

In Yugoslavia, Germany established the puppet state of Serbia, as well 
as Croatia (the latter in collaboration with Italy). The Yugoslav part of 
Banat, in which a considerable German minority is living, was given a special 
status .and was attached to the puppet state of Serbia. After the downfall 
of Mussolini, and especially after the signing of the armistice agreement 
between Italy and the Allies, Germany took over the control of the greater 
part of Yugoslavia and Albania. 

In Greece, Germany occupied Central Macedonia, including Salonika, 
parts of the Aegean region, and the islands of Lemnos, Mytilene, and Chios. 
After the armistice agreement between Italy and the Allies, the Germans ex¬ 
tended their zone of occupation to the area previously occupied by Italy. 

The system of the multiple administrative divisions of the occupied terri¬ 
tories is dictated not merely by administrative expediency and the desire for 
territorial aggrandizement (incorporations); it mainly has for its purpose the 
weakening of the resistance of the controlled nations by dividing their popu¬ 
lations into small groups which are prevented from communication by artifi¬ 
cial boundaries. 

II. Policies 

In regard to local population three different policies have been adopted: 

1. Absorption. The policy of absorption adopted with respect to the in¬ 
corporated areas, such as western Poland, Eupen, Malm6dy and Moresnet, 
Luxemburg, and the Yugoslav provinces of Carinthia, Carniola, and Lower 
Styria, aims at the complete assimilation of a given area with the political, 
cultural, social, and economic institutions of the Greater Reich. This is ef¬ 
fected through the destruction of the national pattern of the area and the 



imposition of a German pattern instead. Indoctrination of National So¬ 
cialism is also employed to a great extent, especially in areas where the 
German cultural pattern preexisted, as in Austria and the Sudeten. 1 
- 2. Forced “Cooperation .” Norway, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, 2 
Greece, Czechoslovakia, and to a certain extent also the three Baltic States— 
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—are being forced into cooperation, which 
comprises full economic cooperation and in part, as to certain groups, po¬ 
litical cooperation as well. Denmark represents a type of forced “coopera¬ 
tion,” mainly in the economic field. 

3. Despoliation. The Government General of Poland, the General Com¬ 
missariat for White Russia (as part of Ostland), and the administration of the 
Ukraine and other Russian territories represent a type of despoliation policy. 
The occupant considers these territories as being the areas of his interests 
( Inleressengebiele). Despite some endeavors the occupant has not suc¬ 
ceeded in finding in these areas people who would be willing to cooperate in 
organizing central governments. The main task of the occupying authori¬ 
ties is to draw from such territories raw materials, food, and labor. 3 

III. Types of Administration 

The following types of administration are to be distinguished: first, Ger¬ 
man administration as carried on by German authorities, and, secondly, local 
administration as exercised by authorities created by the local population 
under German control. 


The following three types of German administration are to be considered: 

1. District Administration by “Gauleiters." Ihis type of administration 
was introduced into the incorporated areas, which were to be absorbed as a 
part of the Greater Reich. According to the German pattern of administra¬ 
tion, the incorporated areas are divided into administrative districts ( Gaue ), 
which form at the same time administrative units of the National Socialist 
Party. The head of the National Socialist Party in the given district 
(Gauleiter) is at the same time governor ( Reichsstatthalter ) of the district. 
The districts are divided into counties and communities. For special pur¬ 
poses of imposing a German pattern upon these areas, an agent of the Reich 

1 See chapter on‘‘Genocide/’below, pp. 83-84. 

2 In the Netherlands the occupant in his first proclamation to the population referred 
to the community of blood between Germans and Dutchmen See proclamation ot the 
Reich Commissioner for the Netherlands Territories to the Netherlands population, dated 

^Un the proclamation of the Governor General to the Polish population, of October 26, 
ioV), it is stated, among other things: “Freed from the compulsion of the adventurous 
policy of your intellectual governing class, you will, under the strong protection of the 
Greater German Reich, do your best in the performance of a universal obligation to work. 
See below, p. 524, 



Commissioner for the Strengthening of Germanism is attached to the office 
of the Gauleiter. This system of administration is being carried out in the 
incorporated Polish territories, in the Sudeten, in Austria, in Luxemburg and 
Alsace-Lorraine, 4 in Eupen, Ma!m6dy and Moresnet, and in the northern 
Yugoslav district (Carinthia, Carniola, and Lower Styria). 

2. Administration by Reich Commissioners and Governors. The non¬ 
incorporated areas, which at the time of occupation were not of any im¬ 
portant strategic significance, as, for example, Norway, the Netherlands, and 
central Poland, were handed over for administration to civilian Reich Com¬ 
missioners. 6 In central Poland (Government General) the civilian head of 
administration is called the Governor General. 

In the same areas there are also military commanders who deal with ques¬ 
tions of military security and military operations. A division of jurisdiction 
is thus created between the Reich Commissioners and military commanders, 
the Reich Commissioners handling matters which relate to the civil domain 
and the military commanders those which relate to the military domain. 

3. Administration by Military Commanders. Countries which at the time 
of occupation were of pronounced strategic importance, such as Belgium, 
!• ranee (within the borders delimited by the armistice agreement), Yugo¬ 
slavia, and Greece, were put under the administration of military com¬ 
manders. The military commanders exercise their authority through field 
and local military commanders throughout the given country. 

1 he military commanders and the Reich Commissioners in the occupied 
countries are directly responsible to the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor him¬ 
self, which fact shows the importance that Hitler attaches to the problem 
of administering these countries, and the extent of his responsibility therefor.* 


I he occupant has called upon the local population to participate in the 
administration of the given country for the implementation of the "New 
Order.” The degree of response of the local population to the demands of 
the occupant, or the lack of such response, is to some degree reflected in the 
type of central local government which has been created in every one of the 
subjugated countries. 7 

Als /-' ce l a , mI hopbine.there is a special civil administration (. Zivilver - 
unltung) headed by a Gauleiter and forming a part of the regular Gnu. 

m-nH n.ifh M the Fi $\ er of Apr 0 iI J 4 » * 94 °, concerning the exercise of govern¬ 

mental authority in Norway, below, p. 498; May 18, 1940, concerning the exercise of gov¬ 
ernmental authority m the Netherlands, below, p. 446; and October 12, 1939 concerning 
^ , T m,8tratl0n occupied Polish territories, below, p. 522. ' 

. / however, throughout all the subjugated countries, irrespective of the “degree of col- 

abolished" Thf, ve . e f"\ ent ln the organization of the local authorities has been 
abolished. I his is especially true as to the administration of municipal and rural com- 

nlen| t ! eS ‘l . Mu " lcl P al,t,es and rural communities were previously administered by peo- 
niumrinnl n , office throu ft h a process of election by the citizens. Thus, the members of 
municipal and rural communities used to elect members of the city or rural council, and 



In countries where there was some degree of response, the following types 
of local central government are to be distinguished: 

i. Puppet Governments and Puppet States . In countries where active 
groups of pro-Nazis, even in minor numbers, were to be found, puppet gov¬ 
ernments have been created. The puppet government is organized as a 
cabinet with a prime minister or a president as the head. Its activities are 
controlled by the occupant. The puppet governments have essentially re¬ 
tained the local authorities (with the exception of agencies whose members 
are elected by the population) and are using them for the administration of 
the country. Puppet governments now function in Norway, in the part 
of Yugoslavia organized by the occupant as Serbia, in Greece, in France 
(P6tain and Laval) and, with certain special restrictions, in the Protectorate 
of Bohemia and Moravia. 

Puppet states are to be distinguished from puppet governments. A pup¬ 
pet state is an entirely new organism created by the occupant, whereas in a 
puppet government only the governmental functions are a creation of the 
occupant, the original state having been in existence before the occupation. 
Slovakia and Croatia are examples of puppet states. The creation of puppet 
states or of puppet governments does not give them any special status under 
international law in the occupied territory. These organizations derive 
their existence from the will of the occupant and thus ought to be regarded 
as organs of the occupant. Therefore the puppet governments and puppet 
states have no greater rights in* the occupied territory than the occupant 
himself. Their actions should be considered as actions of the occupant and 
hence subject to the limitations of the Hague Regulations. This view, it 
may be added, is in agreement with the attitude of the Norwegian Supreme 
Court in Oslo 8 as to the Quisling government, and also of the Yugoslav Gov- 
ernment-in-Exile, which has not recognized any transfers of property under¬ 
taken in occupied Yugoslavia by the occupant or by the puppet authorities 
established by the occupant. 

2. Headless or Subcabinet Governments. In Belgium and the Netherlands 
a central government, which we shall call “headless government,” or “sub¬ 
cabinet government,” has been introduced. It consists of the secretaries 
general of the particular departments of government. Before the occupa- 

the members of the council in turn elected the mayors and the most important assistants 
of the mayor. This form of elective self-government grew up in some countries by way 
of an evolution of democratic institutions (Poland, Norway, France), and in some countries 
elective local self-government came about as a result of a hard political fight against abso¬ 
lutist regimes. This latter statement is true, generally speaking, of Central Europe after 
the revolutions of 1848. Municipal and rural self-government were institutions deeply 
entrenched in the political life of the countries occupied. The occupant, however, abol¬ 
ished the principle of elective self-government and introduced in most of the subjugated 
C u^ nt /^ CS L the . rr P^ n Municipal Code of 1935, which is based upon the principle of leader¬ 
ship ( Fuhrerprinzip ). According to this code, the members of municipal councils, as well 
as the mayors and their assistants, are appointed by German authorities. 

8 See chapter on “ Norway,” below, Part II. 



tion of Belgium and the Netherlands, the secretary general was the highest 
public civil servant in a given ministry with the exception of the minister 
himself. He was second only to the minister. Whereas the minister’s 
tenure of office was subject to political changes, the secretary general, on the 
other hand, was a permanent part of the civil service and not subject to 
change to the same extent. Because of their professional skill and some¬ 
times long experience, the secretaries general represent a valuable element 
in government. The occupant retained them in office and put them in 
charge of the administration of their ministries. However, the secretaries 
general do not serve as a cabinet but for the most part act separately, unless 
they are called upon by the occupant for common action. The occupant 
controls the activities of the secretaries general by special commissioners. 9 * 10 
A special kind of headless government has also been introduced in the three 
Baltic States. Here the heads of the departments are called councillors (in 
Lithuania) and directors (in Estonia and Latvia), instead of secretaries gen¬ 
eral. However, the authority and scope of activities of the councillors and 
directors are less than those of the secretaries general. 

3. Utilization of Services of Minor Authorities. In countries where no re¬ 
sponse or collaboration was received the services of only minor authorities 
and lower officials have been utilized by the occupant. Such a situation has 
occurred in the Government General of Poland, in the Polish territories in¬ 
cluded in the General Commissariat for White Russia, and in the Russian 

4. Utilization of Services of All Existing Governmental Authorities. This 
situation occurred in Denmark, where the King and practically all authori¬ 
ties continued to function. The German Army in Denmark took charge of 
the military situation, while control over the Danish Government was exer¬ 
cised by the German Minister in Denmark, whose authority was backed by 
the Gestapo and the presence of the German Army and military commander. 
This situation changed after the revolt of August, 1943 (see Denmark). 

IV. Usurpation of Sovereignty 

Belligerent occupation is essentially temporary. It does not transfer 
sovereignty over the occupied territory. The occupant holds the territory in 
trust for the future peace conference to decide upon its ultimate disposi- 

• The headless governments continue the publication of the official gazettes. The or¬ 
ders and decrees of the secretaries general are promulgated in Belgium in the Momteur 
Beige and in the Netherlands in the Staatsblad. . . . 

10 Because of the excessive zeal “displayed by some of the secretaries general in Belgium 
in exploiting the country" to the benefit of the occupant, the head of the Belgian Govern¬ 
ment-in-Exile, in talks over the radio from London, has warned the secretaries general 
about some of their practices considered by him to be adverse to the national interest. 
See the magazine Belgium (New York), I, No. 11 (1941), p. 36; II, No. 17 (J94 1 )* P- 37; 
also R. Ardenne, German Exploitation of Belgium (Washington: The Brookings Institu¬ 
tion, 1942), p. 6, 



tion. 11 Therefore, the occupant has no right to perform such acts as would 
indicate that he has usurped sovereignty. However, during the present 
occupation the German occupant has usurped sovereignty over the occupied 
areas mainly by the following acts: 

(1) By incorporations flagrante bello of parts of Poland, Belgium, France, 
and Yugoslavia, and all of Luxemburg and Danzig. 

(2) By using in decrees the word “former” in regard to states whose terri¬ 
tory he has occupied. This is especially true as to Poland, with respect to 
which the occupant uses regularly the expression “property of the citizens of 
the former Polish State,” or “property of the former Polish State,” and so on. 

(3) By introducing a German pattern of administration in the incorpo¬ 
rated areas. 

(4) By changing the customs frontiers. 

(5) By changing basic laws of the occupied countries and introducing 
German law and German courts, and by compelling the courts to render jus¬ 
tice in the name of the German nation—not in the name of law, as should be 
the procedure in the occupied area.. 

Further examples of usurpation of sovereignty are to be seen in the follow¬ 
ing acts of the occupant: 

(a) The local German population of the incorporated areas has been 
granted representation in the Reichstag of Greater Germany. This is 
granted on the basis of one representative to every 60,000 Germans over 
twenty years of age living in these areas. The representative must be over 
twenty-five years of age and is appointed a member of the Reichstag. The 
act providing for the nomination of representatives in the Reichstag of 
Greater Germany was promulgated for Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet by 
the decree of February 4, 1941. 12 

( b ) The Germans living in these incorporated areas became German citi¬ 
zens or German nationals. According to the German Nationality Code, 
there are two types of nationality. The superior type, called Burger , em¬ 
braces Germans of German origin who are in every respect loyal to the Nazi 
regime. Citizenship in this conception confers rights of active participation 
in the political life of the country, as, for example, representation in the 
Reichstag, military service, the right to be an official, and so on. The second 
type of nationality, Staatsangehorige , which is merely a conception of legal 
relationship with the Reich, consists mainly of the right to possess a German 
passport and all the privileges deriving therefrom. Persons of non-German 
blood cannot be Burger, but they can be Staatsangehorige. In the incorpo- 

11 As to American authorities, see the very clear statement that connuest passes no na¬ 
tional title. That is accomplished only by treaty. De Lima v. Biawell, 182 U. S. i, 
194; 21 Sup. Ct. 743; 45 L. Ed. 1041 (1902). 

See also U. S. War department, Basic Field Manual: Rules of Land Warfare, prepared 
under the direction of the Judge Advocate General (Washington, 1940), Chap. 10, 44 Military 
Occupation and Government of Enemy Territory." 

12 See below, p. 315. 


rated areas the Germans have introduced the same division of nationality as 
in Germany, but they have applied it in a different way. Poles, Jews, Bel¬ 
gians, and Frenchmen cannot become either citizens or nationals. In the 
incorporated areas nationality of the superior type—that is, citizenship— 
was granted to persons of German origin, and nationality of the inferior 
type could be granted to people of German or related blood, 13 such as the 
Flemings (but not the Walloons). The same principle was adopted in 
Alsace-Lorraine and Czechoslovakia. 14 

( c ) Military conscription was introduced in the Polish territories by the 
decree of the Supreme Commander of the German Armed Forces of April 
30, 1940. 16 It was also introduced into Alsace-Lorraine. 16 

The above-mentioned acts regarding citizenship and representation in the 
Reichstag, as well as military conscription, implied necessarily taking an 
oath of allegiance to the occupying power, which is contrary to Article 45 of 
the Annex to Hague Convention IV, 17 and to the prevailing doctrine of in¬ 
ternational law. Moreover, military conscription in occupied territory is 
expressly prohibited by Article 52 of the Hague Regulations, which states 
that the inhabitants of the occupied territory cannot be compelled to take 
part in operations of war against their country. 

13 As to Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet, see decree of May 23, 1940 (below, p. 313), as 
well as the additional decree on nationality of September 23, 1941 (below, p. 316), which 
has partially modified the principle of “related blood.” 

14 As to Czechoslovakia, see particularly dual citizenship, below, p. 346. 

16 See below, p. 508. 

18 See announcement by the Chief of Police in Strassburg that all males born in the years 
1920-1924 must register for military service (Strassburger Neueste NachrichUn of Septem¬ 
ber 26, 1942). 

17 For the sake of brevity the annex to this convention, “ Regulations respecting the 
Laws and Customs of War on Land,” is hereinafter cited as the Tlague Regulations. 



I. German Police in General 

i . History. German police play a very great part in organizing and main¬ 
taining political life in Germany itself and in the occupied countries in 
particular. They provide the main striking power for National Socialism. 
The political efficiency of the German police and their faithfulness to Nazism 
may be explained by their history. It began in the form of the S.S. ( Schulz - 
staffelri), or Elite Guard of the National Socialist Party before Hitler took 
over power. These guards originally gave assistance at party meetings in 
protecting physically the members of the party against political opponents. 
On January 6, 1929, Hitler, as Fiihrer of the National Socialist Party, ap¬ 
pointed Himmler as Reich Leader of the S.S. After the advent of Hitler 
to power, the fusion of the S.S. with the police was started. Between 
March 9, 1933, and April, 1934, the Reich Leader of the S.S. was successively 
appointed Chief of the State Police in each of the Lander 1 outside Prussia 
( Reichsfiihrer der S.S. und Chef der deulschen Polizei). On February io, 
1936, 2 the State Secret Police (Gestapo) was created for Prussia by Goring 
as Minister-President for Prussia, and Reich Leader of the S.S. Himmler 
became the Deputy Chief of the Gestapo. The above-mentioned law of 
February 10, 1936, defines its tasks as follows: “The State Secret Police 
(Geheime Stoats polizei) has the task of investigating and fighting against 
all movements dangerous to the State in all spheres of State existence, of 
collecting and exploiting the results of investigations, of reporting to' the 
Government and of keeping other authorities informed on all current is¬ 
sues of importance to them, and providing them with the requisite conclu¬ 
sions.” 3 Since then Reich Leader of the S.S. Himmler has acted in a dual 
capacity as Deputy Chief of the Prussian Gestapo and as commander of the 
political police of the Lander outside Prussia. 4 Later on Himmler by his own 
orders extended the Gestapo organization (which had existed previously only 
in Prussia) also to the other Lander . 5 Thus Goring started the Gestapo in 

1 By Ldnder is meant the various former states, such as Bavaria, Saxony, Prussia, etc., 
which were united to form Germany in 1871. 

2 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1936, No. 2034. 

3 Deutsche Allgemeitte Zeitung, June 13, 1942, quoted from “The Nazi Police System in 
Germany and in Poland," Polish Fortnightly Review , No. 69 (London, June 1, 1943), p. 4. 

4 The political police in the Lander at that time are to be distinguished from the Gestapo, 
which existed then only in Prussia. 

6 See reference to these orders of the Reich Leader of the S.S. and Chief of the German 
Police of April 10 and July 15, 1937, concerning Bavaria and Saxony, and orders of the same 
of February 15 and March 15, 1938, concerning Anhalt, Baden, Brunswick, Bremen, Ham¬ 
burg, Hesse, Mecklenburg, the Saar, Oldenburg, Thuringia, and YVurttemberg. Dr. Karl 
Schafer, Polizeivenvaltungsgeselz (Berlin, 1939), p. 185. 




Prussia and Himmler expanded it throughout all the German Reich and 
even outside Germany, including the occupied countries. 

2. The S.S. and the Gestapo. In his capacity as Reich Leader of the S.S., 
Himmler has created a very intimate connection between the S.S. and the 
Gestapo. As mentioned above, before the advent of Hitler to power the S.S. 
consisted of small groups of National Socialist party guards, whose task was 
to protect the men of the party against physical attacks by political oppo¬ 
nents. On the assumption of power by Hitler, the S.S. became the most 
powerful unit in Germany, in which all the party aristocracy was organized. 
Himmler endeavored to supplant the idea of the former Prussian Junker 
caste by the conception of the S.S. organization. Accordingly, special 
training was established in the S.S. Junker School. The selection of candi¬ 
dates is restricted. The Aryan origin of the candidates is investigated as 
far back as 1800, and to be accepted for training they must have reached a 
certain stage in the Hitler-Youth organization and must have the reputation 
of devout National Socialists. 8 

The S.S. men constitute the reservoir from which the ranks of the German 
police, especially of the Gestapo, are filled. It may be stated generally that 
although not every member of the S.S. is a member of the police, every Ger¬ 
man policeman—and in particular every Gestapo agent—belongs to the S.S. 7 

3. Differentiation of German Police . The police are divided into two main 
groups: (1) Ordnungspolizei— Public Order Police; and (2) Sicherheitspolizei 
—Security Police. The Ordnungspolizei embrace in the main the uniformed 
regular police, that is, the Schutzpolizei (to be distinguished from the 
Schutzstaffeln) , the Gendarmerie , and the administrative police, while the 
Sicherheitspolizei comprise the criminal police and the Gestapo. In addition 
there is a Security Service of the Reich Leader of the S.S., called Sicker- 
heitsdienst des Reichsfuhrers S.S. , which acts as an espionage organization for 
the party and state. In this field it also assists the Security Police ( Sicher¬ 
heitspolizei ). The Security Service collaborates with all the authorities, 
who are bound to provide information to it. 8 Its membership is secret and 
the members do not wear uniforms. 

4. Police and the Law. Two main problems arise in establishing the rela¬ 
tions between the police and the law: (1) Are the police bound to observe the 
law in their activities; and (2) are acts of the police controlled by administra¬ 
tive courts or by common courts? Both questions are to be answered in the 
negative. It may be said that little as law is observed by the German state, 
it is still less observed by the police. The main idea is, on the one hand, to 
give the police a great striking power, and, on the other hand, not to bind 

* Polish Fortnightly Revieu', No. 69, pp. 3-4. 

7 See “Government and Politics in Germany," by Karl Loewenstein, in Governments of 
Continental Europe , edited by James T. Shotwell (New York, 1940), p. 489. 

8 See order by the Reich Ministry of the Interior of November 11, 1938, in Karl Schafer, 
op. cit. t p. 33. 



them by procedure in “protecting the interest of the nation.” In modern 
states law plays a rather considerable role in police relations because of the 
inherent necessity of protecting the rights of individuals. But the German 
police are trained in the idea embodied in the slogan, “You are nothing; the 
nation is everything.” {Du bist nichts; das Volk ist alles.) 9 Consequently, 
provisions of law cannot play any important r61e in their activities. Such 
views were expressed by leading Gestapo men such as Heydrich, the Gestapo 
Chief and Deputy Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia, killed in 1942. 10 

The police are guided in their activities by principles based not so much on 
the law 11 as on the doctrines of the Nazi party and the Fiihrer. Regulations 
of the government and decisions of courts are to be followed only as a sec¬ 
ondary source for their guidance. According'to the commentators on the 
German Police Code {PolizeiVerwaltungsgesetz) , Scheer and Bartsch, the hier¬ 
archy of sources to be follow r ed by the police as a guide for their activities is: 

a) The program of the National Socialist Party and the book of the 

Fiihrer, Mein Kampf; 

b) Opinions expressed by the Fiihrer in his speeches and statements; 

c) Ordinances of the government; 

d) Authors and decisions of courts in the period after Hitler assumed 

control in Germany. 12 

There follows as a natural consequence of such an attitude the fact that 
from the decisions of the Gestapo there is no review by administrative 
courts. 13 

In their further comments on the Police Code, Scheer and Bartsch state sig¬ 
nificantly: “ Even if the Gestapo may have committed an abuse of power, such 
an act cannot be controlled by administrative courts, nor by other courts.” 14 

The specifically privileged position of the Gestapo in relation to law is 
stressed by the fact that it has judicial autonomy. The law of November 1, 
I939, 16 provides special courts {Gericht der geheimen Staals polizei) for the 
Gestapo. Such courts try Gestapo members and also persons who are 
guilty of attacks against members of the Gestapo. 

9 Bernhard Scheer and Georg Bartsch, Das PolizeiVerwaltungsgesetz (Berlin, 1939), p. n. 

10 In an article by him which appeared in Deutsches Recht (193b), he states: 44 1 have 
from the beginning taken the attitude that it is a matter of complete indifference to me 
whether any paragraph [of law] is in opposition to our work. For the fulfillment of my task 
I do fundamentally that for which I can answer to my conscience in my work for the Fiihrer 
and nation. I am completely indifferent whether others gabble to-day about breaking the 
law." Polish Fortnightly Review , No. 69, p. 2. 

11 44 It is of greater importance that the police shall serve, and be close to the life of, the 
nation, than to follow the letter of the law.” Scheer and Bartsch, op. cit p. 10. 

n Ibid., p. 12. b 

13 See Section 7 of the law concerning the State Secret Police of February 10, 1936 ( Preu - 
ssische Cesetzsammlung, 21): ‘‘ Orders and activities of the State Secret Police are not subject 
to review by the administrative courts.” 

It must be noted that administrative courts still function in Germany in certain respects. 
See R. E. Uhlman and H. G. Rupp, “The German System of Administrative Courts,” 
Illinois Law Review, Vol. 31 (1937), PP- **47* 1028. 

u Op. cit., pp. 30-31. 15 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1939, I, p. 2293. 



5. Recruitment. Members of the police are appointed first on a temporary 
basis, with the right of cancellation of the appointment, and later on a per¬ 
manent basis. In order to be appointed on a permanent basis, quite long 
probationary periods are required: for officers, five years; for minor members 
of the Gestapo or criminal police, twelve years. 16 These unusually long pro¬ 
bationary periods have for their purpose the inspiring of devotion in the ap¬ 
pointed members to the person of the Fiihrer and zeal for his program. 

The appointment of any official in Germany is based upon the Reich’s 
confidence in him and the assurance that the official will always endeavor to 
justify this confidence and will be conscious of his high mission. The 
Fiihrer and the Reich demand from him real love for the country and readi¬ 
ness to sacrifice everything for it. 17 The relationship of the police to the 
Fiihrer is not primarily of a legal and administrative character, but is rather 
of an emotional nature, finding expression in the words, “faithfulness to the 
Fiihrer till death.” 

6. Political Indoctrination. Members of the police, particularly of the 
Gestapo, are, practically speaking, the most active fighters for National So¬ 
cialism. Therefore, they are trained carefully in its doctrines. 18 Such mat¬ 
ters as racial theories, geopolitics, history of German ideas of hegemony, eu¬ 
genics, the Jewish problem, Catholicism as a political problem, Communism, 
relations with the Anglo-Saxon world, colonial questions, economic and 
political penetration to cite only some of them—are basic subjects in the 
program for indoctrinating the police, especially the Gestapo. This indoc¬ 
trination is achieved through training, particularly in the S.S. Junker School, 
as mentioned above, which opens the way to a career in the Gestapo. Also 
postgraduate work, so to speak, is continuously carried on by means of 
special courses and publications for the members issued by the Reich Leader 
of the S.S. and Chief of the German Police, 19 as well as through the publi¬ 
cations of the regional chiefs of the police predestined for membership. 20 

II. The Responsibilities of the Police and the S.S. 
in the Occupied Countries 

In the occupied countries the r 61 e of the police and S.S. is of primary im¬ 
portance. In particular the experience of the Gestapo in foreign countries 

18 See paragraphs 3 and 8 of “Das Deutsche Polizeibeamtengesetz, ” June 24, I 937 » 
Reichsgesctzblatt, I, p. 653, No. 72. 

17 “Deutsches Beamtengesctz." January 26, 1937 * ReichsgesetzblaU , I, p. 39 * 

18 See Ueydrich in the Zeitschrift of the Akademie fur Deutsches Recht ( 1937 . 3 ) : 

“The policeman in the National-Socialist State must be a fighter for the National-Socialist 
ideas. Purely technical ability is not sufficient. For fighting the enemies of the State t here 
must also be an unconditional comprehension of the National-Socialist movement of ideas 
and the comprehensive recognition of the fundamental character of his opponent." 

19 Schriflenreihe lies Reichsfuhrers der S.S. und Chefs der deulschen Polizei and Mitt eilunge n 
des Reichsfuhrers der S.S. und des Chefs der deutschen Polizei. 

20 Milteilungsblatt fur die weltanschauliche Schulung. 



before the war enabled that organization to make a special contribution to 
the German administration in every’ conntry later occupied. These pre-war 
activities of the Gestapo in foreign countries were widespread, reaching into 
such fields as politics, economics, culture, press, and racial relations. On 
one hand, the Gestapo gathered information, and on the other hand, it was 
active in playing different elements in the political life of the foreign coun¬ 
tries one against another and in using the weak spots in the social and 
economic structure of these countries for the benefit of Germany. By 
spreading Nazi ideology in foreign countries (ideological penetration), the 
Gestapo paved the way for the creation of fifth columns, which assisted in 
the military conquest of the respective countries. This was true especially 
as to Norway. Thus, members of the Gestapo, following in the wake of the 
military occupation, returned to places which they knew because of their 
pre-war activities. 

1. Organization. In every central administration of the occupied countries 
the police and S.S. have a predominant position in the headquarters of the 
administration chief. The Chief of Police, who is a ranking S.S. officer, 
is technically a member of the central administration staff, and is regularly 
head of the section of public safety. The police and S.S. are represented in 
headquarters by an officer with the title of Superior S.S. and Police Chief 
(Der Hohere S.S. und Polizeifiihrer) . 2l The Superior S.S. and Police Chief 
commands not only the units of the S.S. ( Schutzstaffeln ), the Gestapo, and 
the Sicherheitsdienst , but also the German regular police (Ordnungspolizei ), 
as well as the police units recruited from among the local population. Be¬ 
cause of the special functions he has to fulfill, particularly in such a non¬ 
collaborationist country as Poland, the German Superior S.S. and Police 
Chief in that country was made Deputy of the Governor General of Poland, 
with the title of Secretary of State for Security Matters ( Staatssekretdr fiir das 
Sicherheitswesen). Only with respect to questions of great importance is it 
necessary for him to obtain the consent of the Reich Commissioner or the 
Governor General of the given area. 22 The following scheme of organization 
shows how manifold the police and S.S. functions are: 23 

1. Organization. 

2. Combating the movement for independence. National parties, 

Socialist groups, Communism. 

3. The Secret Press. 

4. Investigation of foreign contacts. 

5. Investigation of Polish centres abroad (in collaboration with the 

Gestapo headquarters in Berlin). 

21 See Section 1 of decree of the Reich Commissioner for the Occupied Netherlands 
Territories concerning the organization and establishment of the office of the Reich Com¬ 
missioner, June 3, 1940, below, p. 450. 

22 Friedrich Wilhelm Adami, “Die Gesetzgebungsarbeit im Generalgouvernement," 
Deutsches Recht, Vol. 16 (1940), p. 608. 

22 Polish Fortnightly Revieiu, No. 69, p. 7. 



6. Polish press abroad. 

7. Industrial defence (counter sabotage). 

8. Control of former officers in the Polish Army. 

9. Combating enemy espionage. 

10. Control of foreigners. 

11. Control of railways. 

12. Control of Germans from the Reich. 

For political reasons the main tasks of the police are carried out, as men¬ 
tioned above, by the Gestapo and the units of S.S. and the Sickerheitsdienst. 
Of especial importance also in some countries, particularly in Poland, is the 
so-called Sonderdienst (Special Service), which consists entirely of Germans 
( Volksdeutsche) . The services of members of the Sonderdienst are the more 
valuable because they know the language of the population and also the local 
conditions. The Sonderdienst is mainly occupied with the collecting of agri¬ 
cultural quotas, the imposition of fines, and the control of prices. 

2. Discretionary Power. Whereas in Germany the discretionary power of 
the police is implied in the exemption of the activities of the police from con¬ 
trol by administrative courts, in the occupied countries such discretionary 
power is established also by express provision; thus, an order of the Reich 
Commissioner of the Netherlands states that “in the fulfillment of his duties 
the Superior S.S. and Police Chief may deviate from existing regulations.” 24 
He may even take over the direct administration of entire areas. 26 Under 
provisions of the same order he “ may promulgate rules and regulations, hav¬ 
ing the force and effect of laws, which are necessary for the fulfillment of his 
duties.” Moreover, “such rules and regulations may contain penal pro¬ 
visions subjecting a defendant to fines of unlimited amount, imprisonment, 
or jail.” Thus, a peculiar situation is created. The population of the occu¬ 
pied country must obey the regulations issued by the police just as if those 
regulations were laws; but the police themselves are not bound by these rules 
which they themselves issue. 

According to a decree concerning private property in the Government 
General of Poland, the Superior S.S. and Police Chief may, in certain cases, 
order sequestrations of property with the object of increasing the striking 
power of the units of the uniformed police and armed S.S., and in ordering 
such sequestrations he is not subject to the limitations of the decree concern¬ 
ing sequestration of private property. He has only to notify the fact of se¬ 
questration to the Director of the Trustee Administration. 28 

The discretionary power of the police goes so far that they may impose 
penalties without judicial procedure, 27 or even take over courts martial. 
Although the courts martial are essentially composed of military men, it is 

24 Order concerning the establishment of administrative courts martial, March 19, I 94 1 * 
below, p. 475. 

2 ’-Ibid. 26 Decree of January 24, 1940, below, p. 534. 

27 See order of August 28, 1940, concerning transactions in real estate in Luxemburg f 

below, p. 422. 



made possible for the police themselves to constitute such courts and to act 
instead of the military. 28 

The addition of the fact that they have judicial autonomy completes the 
picture of the discretionary power of the police. Offenses committed 
against members of the police or committed by the police are tried by “Spe¬ 
cial Criminal Courts established for members of the S.S. and for members of 
the police units mobilized for special duty." 29 

3. Police as Colonizers. The Superior S.S. and Police Chief in every oc¬ 
cupied country is the agent of the Reich Commissariat for the Strengthening 
of Germanism (Reichskommissariat fur die Festigung deutschen Volkstums ).* 0 
This commissariat was created in Berlin after the outbreak of the war and 
was put under the direction of Himmler, Reich Leader of the S.S. and Police 
Chief. The functions of the commissariat were thus defined: “To bring 
back from abroad the German element— Reichs-und Volksdeutsche —to regu¬ 
late the position of foreign nationalities, and also to give shape to the new 
German areas of colonization.” In this connection Himmler stated: “Our 
task is to Germanize the East, not in the old sense of bringing the German 
language and German laws to the people dwelling in that area, but to ensure 
that in the East only people of genuinely German, Teutonic blood shall live.” 31 
This function is carried out by mass deportations of native populations by 
the police (in such countries as Alsace-Lorraine, Poland, and Slovenia), 
by providing assistance in the settlement of the German colonists coming 
into new areas in the occupied countries, and by liquidating owners of busi¬ 
ness enterprises and putting Germans in their place. 

For purposes of colonization the German police have established “Colo¬ 
nization Staffs” ( Ansiedlungsstab ), which carry out all the technical and 
political work of colonization. 

As confiscation of property is a part of the colonization scheme, authority 
in respect to property seizures has also been granted to the police in certain 
cases, as stated above in the section relating to discretionary power. 

4. Liquidation of Politically Undesirable Persons and of the Jews. One of 
the main functions of the police and S.S. is the liquidation of politically unde¬ 
sirable persons and of the Jews. The Gestapo administers large concentra¬ 
tion camps where such persons are being held, and organizes executions. 
The rounding up of the Jews in all the occupied countries and deporting 
them to Poland for physical extermination is also one of the main tasks of the 

28 Decree supplementing; the decree for the suppression of violence in the Government 
General, December 2, 1939, Verordnungsblait des Gcneralgouverncments Rolen , 1939, p. 204. 
See also Adami, op. cit ., p. 606. 

29 See order of July 17, 1940, concerning jurisdiction in criminal proceedings in the occu¬ 
pied Netherlands, below, p. 466. See also order for Norway of August 27, 1940, concerning 
procedure before the German Court, below, p. 501. 

30 See the second order for the enforcement of the decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor 
concerning the organization and administration of the Eastern Territories, November 2, 
1939, below, p. 507. 

31 Deutsche Arbeit, August, 1942. See Polish Fortnightly Review , No. 69, p. 6. 



Gestapo and S.S. units. 82 The Chief of the Gestapo in Poland, Kruger, 
who was killed by Polish patriots, organized the liquidation of the ghettos 
in Polish towns, with the physical annihilation of half a million inhabitants 
of the Warsaw ghetto. “He also built up the technical apparatus of mass- 
murder on three main lines: death by gas in special chambers, electrocution, 
and death in the so-called death trains by the action of quick-lime.” 33 

5. Labor. The police are mainly responsible for mustering the labor man¬ 
power in the occupied countries and deporting it to Germany. They carry 
out the registration of persons at the Reich Labor Office, 34 and sometimes 
they round up people for work in the streets, using physical force. 

III. Local Police 

The extent to which the local police are used by the occupant depends on 
whether there is in the given occupied country a puppet or a headless govern¬ 
ment, or whether neither of these two types of government has been estab¬ 
lished. In the first case, the services of the local police are utilized to a 
greater extent than in the second. In the Netherlands the maintenance of 
public peace, safety, and order is entrusted to the Netherlands police, “un¬ 
less the Reich Commissioner calls on German S.S. or police forces for the en¬ 
forcement of his orders.” 35 In general, the Reich Commissioner appoints 
and divsmisses the Chief Police Commissioners. 38 This is particularly true in 
countries of a non-collaborationist type like Poland, where, for example, the 
local Polish police carry out minor functions such as traffic control, protection 
of buildings, maintenance of patrols and police posts. The Polish criminal 
investigation police investigate crimes committed by Poles, within the sphere 
of jurisdiction of the Polish courts. The Polish police have no right to 
act if one of the parties involved is a German. In such case the Polish police 
must cede the investigation to the German police. 37 

IV. The S.S. and Police and War Crimes 

The foregoing sections show that the S.S. and police are one of the main 
instrumentalities of the administration of the occupied countries. It should 
be noted that some higher officials in the administration of the occupied 
countries, who do not carry out the functions of police, are organizationally 
connected with the S.S. and are given various titles of the S.S. hierarchy. 

32 See below, chapter on “ The Legal Status of the Jews." 

33 Polish Fortnightly Review , No. 69, pp. 7-8. 

34 Proclamation concerning entry into the Reich Labor Service, Luxemburg, February 
12, 1941, below, p. 437. 

35 Order of the Reich Commissioner concerning the exercise of governmental authority 
in the Netherlands, May 29, 1940, below, p. 448. 

M See fourth order of the Reich Commissioner for the Netherlands concerning certain 
administrative measures, August 20, 1940, below, p. 455. 

37 polish Fortnightly Review , No. 69, p. 8 f 



Thus, the police and the S.S. are interwoven with the administration of the 
occupied countries. 

The special functions of the S.S. and the police have given them the op¬ 
portunity to perpetrate the greater part of the war crimes which have oc¬ 
curred during this war. As the United Nations have committed themselves 
to the prosecution of such crimes, 38 the special structure of the S.S. and 
police should be an important factor in determining the basis for a new 
treatment of these crimes. 39 

An analysis of the specific functions of the Gestapo and S.S. and of their 
program and world outlook leads to the conclusion that in the light of their 
close connection and combined activities they constitute an association hav¬ 
ing as its purpose the commission of crimes in genere. Such crimes are di¬ 
rected not only against municipal law of the occupied countries, but also 
against international law and the laws of humanity. Such an association 
amounts to what is called in Anglo-Saxon law conspiracy, or in continental 
European law unlawful association. Therefore, mere membership in such 
groups should be treated as an offense, and all the members of the Gestapo 
and S.S. should be punished for the sole reason that they are carrying out 
such functions in the occupied countries. Moreover, if a member of the 
Gestapo or S.S. has also committed a concrete crime, he should of course 
be punished for this specific crime. 

In connection therewith another issue relating to war crimes arises, namely 
(aside from the problem of the type of courts having jurisdiction—interna¬ 
tional versus national military tribunals) 40 the problem as to whether 
or not the plea of superior orders, that is, the plea that the offender 
acted under orders of his superior, should be taken into consideration as a 
justifiable defense. An offender invoking this plea asserts in effect that he 
personally disapproves the act and he would never have committed it had 
he not been ordered Jo do so in the particular case. That defense pre¬ 
supposes integrity of character and a respect for law and morality on the 
side of the offender, who suffers a conflict between his own conscience and 
the compulsion of service. Such a plea cannot, however, be taken into con¬ 
sideration if the offender is generally and habitually involved in committing 

38 See Declaration on War Crimes, adopted by the Inter-Allied Conference, January 13, 
1942, New York Times, January 14, 1942, p. 6, col. 1. See also statements of the President 
of the United States of America and the British Prime Minister on retribution as one of the 
major war aims, October 25, 1941. Department of State, Bulletin , Vol. V, No. 122 (October 
25, 1941), p. 317. London Times , October 27, 1941, p. 4, col. 7. 

See also George A. Finch, “Retribution for War Crimes," American Journal of Inter¬ 
national Law, Vol. 37 (1943), pp. 81-88. 

39 The author does not attempt to treat adec.juately here the complex problem of war 
crimes. Only because of the exceptional role of the police forces and their specific organi¬ 
zational structure are some of the aspects of this problem dealt with. 

40 See Sheldon Glueck, ‘‘By What Tribunal Shall War Offenders Be Tried?" Harvard 
Law Review, Vol. LVI (June, 1943), p. 1059; “Trial and Punishment of the Axis War 
Criminals," Free World, Vol. IV (November, 1942), p. 138; George A. Finch, “Trial of War 
Criminals Discussed as Military Proceeding," Washington Evening Star , August 26, 1943. 



similar crimes; if he believes that the commission of such crimes is useful to 
him and to his group; or if he has voluntarily joined an organization which 
approves and glorifies such crimes. 

Although there is in general a considerable difference of opinion among 
authorities on international law as to the admissibility of the plea of superior 
orders, 41 one must say that such a plea could in no case be invoked with 
sufficient grounds by the S.S. and police. The main reasons seem to be the 

(1) According to the Hague Regulations, the occupant has the right and 
the duty to restore and maintain public order and safety in accordance with 
the laws in force in the country. Under this provision, the police of the oc¬ 
cupant should undertake only such acts as are necessary to ensure order and 
safety in the given area. They cannot engage in activities aiming at the 
destruction of nations. 

(2) The S.S. and the police in the occupied countries are engaged in a 
program of subjugation, of exploitation, and of destruction of other nations, 
in which they were trained long before the war, and in which they fanatically 
believe. The war crimes committed by them are not sporadic incidents of 
ill-will but are an instrumentality for the carrying out of this program. 

(3) Unlike military service, which is based upon compulsory joining of the 
ranks, service in the police is voluntary and admission to the ranks of the 
police is based upon competitive examinations. 

(4) The relatively long probationary period in the temporary stage of 
employment in the Gestapo lends itself to the development of the excessively 
high degree of zeal displayed by its members, which fact emphasizes even 
more the element of volition in the activities of the individual members of 
the Gestapo. 

(5) The plea of superior orders may rather be made, if at all, by indi¬ 
viduals in isolated cases, but not by great masses of offenders acting together, 
because it is possible for such great numbers to act together also in opposing 
orders which are contrary to their individual consciences. 

(6) The great amount of discretionary power enjoyed by the German 
police gives to individual members the opportunity to reach their own de¬ 
cisions, for which they naturally must be held individually responsible. 

41 The British Manual of Military Law (London, 1914L No. 443; United States War 
Department, Basic Field Manual: Rules of Land Warfare (Washington, 1940), Article 347; 
Oppenheim, International Law (London, 1935), Vol. II, p. 453 * are essentially in favor of the 
plea of superior orders. See a similar view by Ernst J. Cohn, “The Problem of War Crimes 
To-day," in Transactions of the Grotius Society , Vol. 26 (1941), pp. 125, 144. In the main, 
however, Anglo-Saxon doctrine and practice are opposed to the excusing of war crimes on 
the plea of superior orders. See George A. Finch, “Superior Orders and War Crimes, 
American Journal of International Law, Vol. 15 (1921), pp. 440, 444; H. Lauterpacht, in his 
1940 edition of Oppenheim's International Law, Vol. II, p. 454. 

For a discussion of this matter, see Georg Schwarzenberger, International Law and 
Totalitarian Lawlessness (London, 1943), pp. 57“8 i. 



I. Introduction of German Law 

In occupying every new country, the occupant has made it a practice to 
declare, in his first proclamation to the population, that local law would re¬ 
main in force unless contrary to the fact of the occupation. Such a declara¬ 
tion, if made as to any other occupying power than Germany, would imply 
that there would not be many changes in the law; but when made by the 
German occupant this statement signifies a program of changing a great 
body of the laws of a given country. Because the aims of German occupa¬ 
tion are not limited to military considerations but are directed toward the 
integration of the occupied countries into the “New European Order” under 
German hegemony, it becomes obvious that most of the laws of the occupied 
countries are incompatible with the aims of the German occupation. There¬ 
fore, many important changes in law were introduced by the occupant. 
These changes in law are not an exceptional phenomenon, as in previous oc¬ 
cupations, but a mass phenomenon. 1 

German law has been introduced in the occupied countries in varying de¬ 
grees. The following gradations may be considered: 

1. In the Free City of Danzig, and in Memel, and in the incorporated 
Belgian districts of Eupen, MalmSdy, and Moresnet, practically the entire 
body of German and Prussian law was introduced. This was possible be¬ 
cause these cities were governed before the occupation by a great body of 
Prussian law; and as to Eupen, Malm6dy, and Moresnet, the occupant was 
eager to document as soon as possible a return to the situation existing be¬ 
fore 1918, when these districts belonged to Germany. 

2. In Austria and in the Sudeten, it was declared that German laws pro¬ 
mulgated after a specified date following the occupation (for Austria, March 
13, 1938, and for the Sudeten, October 10, 1938) apply also to these terri¬ 
tories, unless a provision to the contrary is made in the given law. Earlier 
German laws were, after these dates, individually introduced in those coun¬ 
tries, such as the Nuremberg Laws; 2 the decree of October, 1936, for the 
execution of the Four-Year Plan; the law originally promulgated on Decem¬ 
ber 1, 1933, and revised on July 3, 1934. for ensuring the unity of party and 
state; and the Reichsstatthalter Act of January 30, 1935, which defined the 

‘See Raphael Lemkin, “Law and Lawyers in the European Subjugated Countries,” 
address before the North Carolina Bar Association, Proceedings of the Forty-fourth Annual 
Session of the North Carolina Bar Association, May, 1942 (Durham, N. C.), pp. 107-16. 

2 As to Austria, see decree of May 20, 1938, Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, p. 594 * 




duties and powers of the governors of the provinces of the Reich. Many 
other examples could be given. 

These territories have never belonged to Germany. The legal institu¬ 
tions of Austria had quite a high standing and were based upon traditions of 
a long evolution of legal culture which had also influenced the legal institu¬ 
tions in other countries. The Sudeten, having been for centuries in this or¬ 
bit, shared the evolution of the same legal institutions and later on came un¬ 
der the influence of Czechoslovak law when the Sudeten were incorporated 
into Czechoslovakia after the Versailles Treaty. Therefore, in the beginning 
the occupant limited himself in these territories to the introduction of law 
having a special political character and relating to the organization of the 
state and National Socialism, such as the Nuremberg Laws and a great body 
of administrative laws connected with the introduction of the Gau adminis¬ 

3. In western Poland (incorporated into Germany), in Alsace-Lorraine, 
and in Luxemburg, no provision was published to the effect that laws pro¬ 
mulgated in the Reich after the occupation should apply directly to these 
territories. On the contrary, they had to be individually introduced in each 
case. However, an extensive volume of law was thus introduced into these 
areas, such as the German Commercial Code, 3 German extradition law, 1 the 
German organization of courts, 6 and the German Lawyers’ Code of Novem¬ 
ber 1, 1936. 6 The German Criminal Code was made applicable to western 
Poland by the decree of June 6, 1940, 7 as were a great number of laws of a 
political and administrative character. 

4. In the last group, embracing all the other occupied territories and the 
Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, a great body of German law was in¬ 
troduced pertaining mainly to economy arid labor. However, in these 
countries the law of the “protection of blood and honor” (as limited to Ger¬ 
mans only) was also made applicable, and laws pertaining to Nazi indoctri¬ 
nation and the protection of German political institutions, as well as particu¬ 
lar German administrative decrees, were introduced. 

In the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, the introduction of German 
law was originally checked by the provisions of the legislative authority of 
the Protectorate. But later on the Reich Protector made extensive use of 
the measures giving him the right to change local law. 

II. Changes in Local Law 

To the extent that German law does not supplant local law in the re¬ 
spective areas the latter law remains in force, but it has undergone many es- 

3 For Poland, see Reichsgesetzblatt , 1941, I, p. 319. 

4 For Poland, see ibid., p. 304. 5 For Poland, see ibid., 1940, I, p. 1907. 

0 See Vcrordnun^sblalt for Luxemburg, 1941, No. 15, p. 104. 

7 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1940, I, p. 844. 



sential changes. These changes were introduced under the pressure of the 
occupant through the puppet and headless governments, and also directly 
by the German authorities themselves—as was done repeatedly in Poland 
and in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. 

The fact that the law was sometimes formally altered, not by the occupant 
directly but by the puppet or headless governments, does not validate the 
changes. The puppet or headless governments, acting on behalf and under 
control of the occupant, derive their authority from the occupant. There¬ 
fore they cannot have rights superior to those of the occupant, who is 
limited by Article 43 of the Hague Regulations. 

The following are additional examples of changes in local law beside those 
quoted elsewhere in this work: 

The Dutch law on citizenship was altered. According to Dutch law as it 
existed prior to the occupation, a Dutchman serving in a foreign army lost 
his citizenship. But as the Germans were eager to see the Dutchmen form 
an anti-Bolshevik legion, the Reich Commissioner published a decree to the 
effect that Dutchmen taking part in the fight against Russia shall not lose 
their Dutch citizenship. 8 

The provisions of the Polish Criminal Code whereby a judge is entitled to 
defer the execution of penalties involving loss of liberty or fines, or to exercise 
mercy in any other way, were declared invalid. 9 

Changes were also made in the family law of Luxemburg, especially as to 
illegitimate children. 10 

In the Netherlands, Articles 92-98 of the Netherlands Civil Code, requiring 
that a girl of Netherlands nationality who is under age should have the con¬ 
sent of her parents, grandparents, or local guardian to marry, were modified 
by the Reich Commissioner to the effect that if such person wishes to marry 
a German the consent of the Reich Commissioner shall be sufficient. 11 
Substituting for the rights of the parents the rights of the Reich Commis¬ 
sioner is a flagrant disregard of family rights, which are under the protection 
of Article 46 of the Hague Regulations. 

III. Departures from Law 

The observance of the letter and spirit of the law is not mandatory accord¬ 
ing to German conceptions. The following institutions of German law 
furnish an illustration: 

1. The Principle of Analogy hi Criminal Law . On June 28, 1935, one of 
the most revolutionary innovations was introduced in the German Criminal 

8 Verordnungsblatt , 1941, No. 133. 

0 See order of February 19, 1940, on Polish jurisdiction in the Government General, 
below, p. 529. 

10 See order of March 22, 1941, below, p. 428. 

11 See order of February 28, 1941, below, p. 474. 



Code. Until that time the principle nulla poena sine lege prevailed, namely, 
that no one could be punished for any act for which punishment was not 
prescribed by law. From then on a person could be punished if the act 
seemed merely analogous to any punishable act prohibited by law. 12 The 
judges could thus expand by analogy the field of criminal law. In order to 
determine what is an analogous case, the German judge had to guide himself 
by “sound popular feeling” and furthermore by Nazi literature, especially 
Mein Kampf and the Ftihrer’s speeches. This conception of the law repre¬ 
sents an encroachment upon the rights of the individual, 13 because it sub¬ 
jects him to the arbitrary opinion of the judge as to what constitutes an 
offense. It destroys the feeling of legal security and creates an atmosphere 
of constant fear and terror. 

A criminal law based upon the principle of analogy seemed to the Germans 
to provide an expedient instrumentality for the enforcement of the New 
Order in the occupied countries. German criminal law was therefore intro¬ 
duced in the incorporated areas, 14 and in the non-incorporated territories 
German criminal law is applied by German courts when they are trying in¬ 
habitants of the occupied countries. 15 This introduction of the German 
criminal law into the occupied countries is a violation of the Hague Regula¬ 
tions. If the occupant considered that the local law did not give sufficient 
protection to his military interests, he could lawfully introduce only the 
provisions of the German Criminal Code aiming at the protection of such 

11 The German law of June 28, 1935, provides: “Any person who commits an act which the 
law declares to be punishable or which is deserving of penalty according to the fundamental 
conceptions of a penal law and sound popular feeling, shall be punished. If there is no 
penal law directly covering an act it shall be punished under the law of which the funda¬ 
mental conception applies most nearly to the said act.” See Jerome Hall, “Nulla poena 
sine lege,” in Yale Law Journal , Vol. 47 (1937), pp. 165-93. 

13 The German innovation provoked great criticism in legal circles outside Germany. The 
Second International Congress of Comparative Law, held at The Hague in 1937, formulated 
a resolution against analogy in criminal law. See particularly reports of Scnaffstein and 
Dahm, representing the German view, and remarks representing the opposite view by Lord 
Justice du Parcq of the King's Bench Division, London; Abd-El-Fattah El-Sayed, member 
of the Supreme Court of Egypt; Ugo Aloisi, President of the Criminal Chamber of the 
Court of Cassation, Rome; Hanna, Justice of the High Court of the Irish Free State; and 
Hall ( Rapporteur ), Pella, Racine, Geesteranus, Glaser, Wolter, Hofmannstahl, Lemkin, 
Donnedieu de Vabres. 

The following is the text of the resolution: 

“Without expressing any preference upon the legal ideologies dominating in different 
countries which, especially in matters of criminal law, have their roots in the traditions, 
customs, moral values, and the political life of each nation, 

“the Congress is in favour af the maintenance of the rule, ‘nulla poena sine lege.'” — 
Voeux et Resolutions du Deuxtime Congrbs International de Droit Compare , La Haye, 4—11 
Aoflt 1937, public par les soins de M. Elem£r Balogh, p. 69. 

The IV° Congr&s Internat ional de Droit Penal, held in Paris in 1937, likewise discussed the 
problem of analogy in criminal law and adopted conclusions as to the inadmissibility of 
analogy. See Revue internationale de droit penal , 1938, No. 1, p. 55. 

14 In the Polish territories, by decree of June 6, 1940, Reichsgesetzblatt, 1940, I, p. 844; in 
Eupen, Malmedy, and Moresnet, by decree of July 29, 1940, below, p. 315. 

16 In Belgium, by order of the Commander in Chief of the German Army of May 10,1940, 
below, p. 319; in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, by order of April 14, 1939, 
below, p. 347; in the Netherlands, by order of July 17, 1940, below, p. 466; in Norway, by 
order of August 27, 1940, below, p. 501; in Yugoslavia, by order of the Commander in 
Chief of the Army promulgated at the front without date, below, p. 597. 



interests. He certainly was not entitled to introduce the Criminal Code 
in toto relating to non-military matters such as family relations, morality, 
and property rights. On the other hand, if the occupant should decide to 
substitute some other law for the local law, he may do so only by substituting 
the one law for the other. However criminal codes of different countries 
may differ among themselves, it may safely be stated that they consist of 
strict rules of law and that they constitute essentially a strict delimitation on 
one side of the right of the state and, on the other side, of the right of the in¬ 
dividual. But the German Criminal Code, because of the principle of analogy 
to which it adheres, cannot be treated as a rule of law. It does not furnish 
the elementary protection of law to which the inhabitants of the occupied 
territories are entitled by Article 43 of the Hague Regulations. That the 
German Criminal Code cannot be treated as a rule of law had been previously 
recognized. When provisions based on the Nazi-modified Criminal Code 
were introduced by decree in Danzig in i 935 > a petition was presented by 
representatives of minority parties to the League of Nations High Com¬ 
missioner protesting against the decrees as violating the Constitution of the 
Free City of Danzig. The petition was in turn presented to the Council of 
the League, which voted to submit the request to the Permanent Court of 
International Justice at The Hague. The Court delivered an advisory 
opinion on December 4, I 935 > 16 which in effect held that the application of 
the German law of June 28, 1935 (introducing the principle of analogy) was 
in violation of the constitutional requirement that the government of the 
Free City be by rule of law. 

2. Other Departures from Law Ordered by the Occupant. Because the prin¬ 
ciple of legality in determining offenses and criminal responsibility was de¬ 
stroyed, the occupant could introduce the principle of retroactivity and even 
punish on the presumption of future guilt, an innovation without parallel in 
modern law. In some instances the occupant has ordered that penalties 
shall be imposed for acts committed before the occupation. 17 In Belgium 
the order concerning factory trustees of April 29, I 94 L was made effective 
retroactively as of February I, 1941, violations of this order being punishable 
by fine or imprisonment. 18 In Luxemburg the decree of January 15, 1941, 
concerning insidious attacks on the Party and the Movement (German 
National Movement), 19 and providing the death penalty in serious cases, was 
made retroactive as of December 1, 1940. 

Besides retroactivity, the presumption of future guilt mentioned above was 
introduced. According to the order of the Reich Commissioner for the 
Netherlands of July 4, 1940, 20 penalties of confiscation may be’imposed in 

Series A/B No. 65; M. O. Hudson, World Court Reports, Vol. Ill (Washington: Carnegie 
Endowment for International Peace, 1938), pp. 516 ff. 

17 “'fhe courts of the armed forces shall also have jurisdiction to try crimes committed 
before the occupation by the German forces/’ See undated order of the Commander in 
Chief of the Army in Yugoslavia, issued at the front, below, p. 597. 

18 See below, p. 325. 19 See below, p. 4 2 5 * 20 below, p. 47®. 



cases where “it must be assumed” that a person will in the future further 
activities hostile to the German Reich and to Germany. 21 

In some instances, the occupant has declared that the authorities shall 
not be bound by law at all or that some essentially legal matters shall be ac¬ 
complished without judicial procedure. Thus the order of the Reich Com¬ 
missioner for the Netherlands establishing administrative courts martial 
has created the institution of a special agent for the area in which the ad¬ 
ministrative court martial has been decreed. This special agent takes over 
the entire public administration and in the fulfilling of his duties he “shall 
not be bound by law.” 22 Also, as mentioned in die preceding chapter, when 
the Governor General of Poland on January 24, 1940, introduced a decree 
on sequestration of private property, he exempted the police from observing 
the provisions of this decree in certain cases when they are ordering seques¬ 
trations. 23 


The divorce of administration from law in the occupied countries seems to 
be in line with the complete abolition of legality in German public life. On 
August 20, 1942, Hitler issued a decree granting special full powers to the 
Reich Minister of Justice, which reads: “A vigorous administration of justice 
is necessary for the fulfillment of the tasks of the Greater German Reich. I 
order and empower, therefore, the Reich Minister of Justice to organize a 
National Socialist administration of justice and to undertake all necessary 
measures, in accordance with my instructions and guidance, and in agree¬ 
ment with the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery, as well as 
the Chief of the Party Chancellery. The Reich Minister of Justice may 
hereunder deviate from existing law.” 24 

The introduction of German law into the occupied countries cannot be jus¬ 
tified by the occupant on the ground of military necessity. The purpose of 
the mass introduction of German law into the incorporated areas is dictated 
by the desire to assimilate these areas as soon as possible with the Greater 
German Reich. As incorporation is of itself a violation of international 
law, all actions tending to this end must also be considered as illegal. The 
introduction of German law and the changing of local law in the non-incor¬ 
porated areas are dictated, as reflected in the character of the laws, by the 
occupant’s plan to integrate these countries into the New European Order. 
Such introduction of German law cannot be justified by the occupant on the 
ground of military necessity (Article 43 of the Hague Regulations), because 
the integration of the occupied countries into the New Order is obviously a 
political objective and has no realistic relation to the needs of the army or the 

21 Basing penalties upon presumption of future guilt is an institution of mediaeval German 
law, especially as codified later in the Constitute Carolina criminalis. 

22 See order of March 19, 1941, below, p. 475. 

M See below, p. 534. As to deviations from law, especially by police, see above, chapter 
on “ Police." 24 ReichsgesetzblaU , 1942, No. 91. 



successful conduct of the military operations. Hence it cannot be classified 
as a measure dictated by military necessity. It was not contemplated in the 
Hague Regulations that an occupant should undertake plans or actions 
which would enter into the post-war period. 

Moreover, the ideological substance of German law should also be en¬ 
visaged. One may state that German law is bereft of itioral content and self¬ 
limitations, being predominantly utilitarian. Law to the Germans is that 
which is useful to them. 25 

German law is based upon the principle of discrimination and not of equal¬ 
ity. It is subordinative to the state and not protective of the rights of the 
citizen. In this respect it denies the main principle and mission of law, be¬ 
cause the individual, as the weaker party in his relations with the state, 
needs more protection by law than does the state. German law is not con¬ 
ceived as human justice. It invokes legal technique simply as a means of 
administrative coercion. 26 

German law is cruel in its content. It has not only revived the jus talionis 
—the principle of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth—but has surpassed 
it by exacting penalties in the ratio of ten eyes for one, or punishments 
wholly without relation to guilt. It has divorced law from morality and 
mercy. 27 

Consequently, the introduction of German law in the occupied countries 
is not only in violation of the Regulations of the Hague Convention but also 
of the very principles of the law of nations and also of the laws of humanity. 28 

26 At the session of the Academy of German Law in Berlin in November, 1939, Mans Frank, 
the President of this Academy and former Reich Minister of Justice, who was appointed as 
Governor General of Poland, declared: “We are proud that we have constructed our legal 
principles so that nothing is to be changed in war. Law is that which is useful and necessary 
for the German nation; that is unlawful which harms the interests of the German nation. 
These principles guide us in these times ."—Juristische Wochenschrift, December, 1939. 

w Address on “The Legal Framework of Totalitarian Control over Foreign Economies,” 
by Raphael Lemkin, before the Section of International and Comparative Law of the 
American Bar Association in Indianapolis, September 29^-October 3, 1941. 

,7 See decree of February 19, 1940, prohibiting Polish judges from exercising mercy and 
parole, below, p. 529; also the decree of December 22, 1941, providing the death penalty 
for sheltering Jews—a denial of the most humane of all human rights, that of giving help in 
distress, below, p. 601. 

This ruthless character of German law and the implications therefrom for the legal 
life of the occupied countries gave rise to the adoption of a resolution of the American Bar 
Association at its Indianapolis session in October, 1941, as proposed by the late John T. 
Vance, Law Librarian of Congress, and Judge Keaton of Oklahoma: 

" Whereas, Municipal law has been replaced in most of the continent of Europe by the 
lex talionis; and 

“Whereas, The legal profession of those nations whose sovereignty has been ruthlessly 
despoiled by Axis powers, has been reduced to the status of servile dependence or completely 
abolished, and many of our colleagues have been executed, imprisoned, or forced to seek 
refuge in distant lands; now, therefore, be it 

11 Resolved, That the American Bar Association expresses to its European brethren in 
distress its profound sympathy and the hope that the day may soon come when their coun¬ 
tries may be freed and they may be restored to their former place of trust and honor.” 
—American Bar Association Journal , Vol. 27 (1941), p. 726. 

28 See the preamble to Hague Convention IV. 



The occupant has introduced into the occupied countries important 
changes in the organization of the courts. A great part of the jurisdiction 
has been taken over by German courts, and their jurisdiction sometimes 
varies from country to country. Even within one country the vague de¬ 
limitation of jurisdiction augments the feeling of legal insecurity. 

I. German Courts 

A common feature of German courts is that sufficient care is not taken in 
their procedure to safeguard the rights of the defendant. For example, no 
preliminary investigation is made in some cases, such as those tried before 
special courts or courts martial. 1 Furthermore, no appeal lies from the de¬ 
cisions of special courts, although in some countries, such as Poland, they 
are empowered to pronounce the death penalty. Notice is served on the de¬ 
fendant in so short a time as twenty-four hours before the trial, and he may 
have counsel appointed to defend him only if it seems “expedient. 2 Gen¬ 
erally speaking, only German counsel may appear, although in exceptional 
cases, if the German authorities will admit them, members of the local bar 
in occupied countries may appear before German courts to defend their 

compatriots. ..... • 

An especially severe regime as to legal recourse was established in me 
Ostland. According to the decree of the Reich Commissioner for the Ost- 
land, Jews are allowed no legal recourse against the decision of a German 
court. Moreover, the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland may exclude at 
his discretion other entire groups of people from the right of legal recourse. 3 

The generally admitted principle that a judge of original jurisdiction can¬ 
not act as a judge in an appeal of the same case was violated by the order of 
July 17, 1940, 4 whereby the judge whose order has been attacked by a motion 
to set it aside is not disqualified from sitting with a full court of three in de- 
ciding on such a motion. 

The insecurity of the defendant is further increased by the lack of finality 
of the decision. According to the above-mentioned order of the Reich C om- 
missioner of the Netherlands, the Attorney General may, within one year 
after a judgment of a German court, file a petition to have such judgment de¬ 
clared void. If the Reich Commissioner sets aside the judgment, there is 

1 For Norway, see order of August 27, 1940, below, p. 501. , f A t 

* For Poland, see decree of February 19, 194 <>. helow, p. 525; for Norway, order of August 

27 J V^>r^ung5&U^l 941, p. 31. 4 Order for the Netherlands territories, below, p. 466, 




not only a trial de novo , but the court is “bound to follow” the Reich Com¬ 
missioner’s “mandate as to the applicable law contained in the reasons 
given for setting aside the original judgment.” 5 Thus the Reich Commis¬ 
sioner not only supervises justice but also directs the decisions of the courts. 

One of the striking features in the organization of these courts is the intro¬ 
duction of the principle of extraterritoriality for Germans in the occupied 
countries (see below), and also the fact that the courts are not the only insti¬ 
tutions empowered to exercise judicial functions. The German military 
commanders of France, the district governors in Poland, and S.S. officers in 
Poland may inflict penalties upon the inhabitants. Because they are em¬ 
powered to take such action without judicial procedure, the exercise of this 
power is referred to as “summary penal jurisdiction.” An appeal lies within 
twenty-four hours to the superior of the officer who has passed the order of 
punishment. 6 In Yugoslavia military commanders, and in Poland S.S. 
officers, may order confiscations and sequestrations without judicial pro¬ 
cedure, and without the right of review for the defendant. 7 In France the 
German commanders may inflict fines up to 30,000 Reichsmarks and, if the 
fine cannot be levied, imprisonment in lieu of the fine up to six weeks. 8 

The following types of tribunals prevail in the organization of courts in 
occupied Europe: 

1. Military Courts , called also “courts of the armed forces” ( Wehrmachts - 
gerichte ). The military courts try cases involving military treason, offenses 
connected with army activities or directed against the German armed forces 
or their members, and even offenses committed in premises used by or for 
purposes of the German armed forces. 

2. Special Courts. The jurisdiction of special courts varies from country 
to country. For the most part it is not defined beforehand but is provided 
for in every special decree issued by the German occupant for the protection 
of special interests, it being generally specified in these decrees that the 
offenses shall be tried by special courts. Thus special courts, in Poland for 
example, try cases involving violations of the law concerning use of the 
German salute, 9 of the law requiring the wearing of Jewish insignia, 10 of the 
law establishing a Bank of Issue in Poland, 1 11 of the various decrees concerning 
sequestration of property, 12 etc. In Norway, again, the special courts try 
cases involving violations of the law prohibiting political parties, 13 and also 

6 Order for the Netherlands territories, below, p. 470. 

See order for the district commanders in occupied France, of September 10, 1940, below, 

1 7 ^See order of the Commander of the German Army in Serbia, of December 22,1941, below, 
p. 598; and decree for the Government General of Poland of January 24, 194 °. below, p. 534. 

8 See order by the Chief of Military Administration in France, of September 10, 1940, 
below, p. 394. 

9 Verordnutigsblait, 1939, p. 62. 

10 Order of November 23, 1939, Verordnungsblalt, 1939, No. 8, p. 61. 

11 Decree of December 15, 1939 . below, p. 537. 

12 See decree of January 24, 1940, below, p. 531. 

18 See orders of September 25 and October 25, 1940, below, pp. 499. 5 <> 3 - 



cases involving violation of the law concerning prohibition of activities on 
behalf of the Royal House of Norway; 14 while in Luxemburg the special 
court tries cases involving disturbances of public order or activities inimical 
to Germany or Germans, conversation with prisoners, ceasing work in dis¬ 
regard of German interests, 15 etc. 

3. Courts Martial. These courts try cases involving attacks which are 
.made against the German administration (and sometimes the German 

Army), as well as attacks made on individual Germans because of their na¬ 
tionality. 10 They are called “Administrative Courts Martial” in the 
Netherlands, and their jurisdiction there is very general, being defined as 
covering cases which involve intentional participation “ in activities likely to 
disturb or to endanger public order and the safety of public life” or inten¬ 
tional violation of “special orders of the Reich Commissioner.” Despite 
the general nature of this jurisdiction, however, the penalties to be im¬ 
posed are quite definite, namely, death, and in less serious cases hard labor, 
either for life or for a period of not less than ten years. 17 

4. German Courts of General Jurisdiction. These courts are called German 
courts of original jurisdiction and German superior courts (acting mostly as 
appellate courts), and they have jurisdiction over both civil and criminal 
cases. Their criminal jurisdiction includes cases involving German na¬ 
tionals. Thus, if a German national commits a crime in any conspiracy 
with one or more inhabitants of the occupied country, the case must be tried 
by a German court.. 18 German courts also try non-Germans in cases in¬ 
volving German interests. Such interests are defined as those involved in 
offenses committed against the Greater German Reich or the National 
Socialist Party, in acts against Germans or persons in the service of Ger¬ 
many, and in offenses committed during service for German authorities 
(or in premises used by German authorities), as well as in acts of pillage. 19 
In the matter of civil jurisdiction, the principle adopted is that cases in 
which even one party is a German must be tried by German courts. 

II. Local Courts of the Occupied Countries 

The local courts of the occupied countries were either abolished completely 
or limited in their jurisdiction and organization. Thus the Supreme Courts 

14 See orders of October 7, and October 25, 1940, below, pp. 500, 503. 

16 See order of August 20, 1940, below, p. 421. 

The special courts are German, except in Norway, where this type of tribunal is called 
“Norwegian Special Court" and where the Norwegian judges are appointed by the Com¬ 
missioner of State for the Department of Justice or, more recently, by the Norwegian 
Minister of Justice. See order of October 25, 1940, below, p. 503. 
lfl Verordnunzsblatt for Poland, 1939, pp. 8, 10, 223. 

17 See order of March 19, 1941, below, p. 475. . 

18 See decree of February 19, 1940, concerning German jurisdiction in the Government 

General, below, p. 525. f 

19 As to Poland, see ibid.; as to the Netherlands, see order of the Reich Commissioner of 
July 17, 1940, below, p. 466. 



of Poland, Austria, and Luxemburg were abolished. In incorporated west¬ 
ern Poland, in Eupen, Malm6dy and Moresnet, and in Austria, all local 
courts were abolished and German courts introduced in their stead, these 
pronounce sentences in the same way as do the courts in the Greater German 
Reich, namely, “in the name of the people” (im Narnen des Volkes ). In 
other occupied territories, the local courts were retained with a limited juris¬ 
diction. These limitations derive from: (i) the granting of the privilege of 
extraterritoriality to German inhabitants, and (2) the stringent supervision 
of local courts by the German authorities. 

The principle of extraterritoriality was introduced by the provision ex¬ 
cluding German inhabitants of the occupied countries from the jurisdiction 
of the local courts. 30 If one party is a German, or if his nationality is not 
defined, then the case must be tried before a German court. A Polish court 
may not even hear a German witness. 

As has been indicated, the supervision of the local courts by German au¬ 
thorities is very strict. In the order of the Reich Commissioner for the 
Netherlands of May 29, 1940, 21 it was declared that the judiciary is inde¬ 
pendent; but in the same decree it was stated that “ the Reich Commissioner 
will determine which judgments are to be submitted for his confirmation be¬ 
fore execution may be issued.” In Poland the German authorities may 
withdraw any case from a Polish court and transfer it to a German court. 
Judgments of a Polish court may be disregarded by a German court and 
the case tried de novo by the German court. 22 


The organization of German courts and the changes in the organization of 
local courts have brought about a disintegration of the existing judicial 
organization. These changes brought about the abolition of legal security— 
a principle of judicial organization upon which the social structure of the 
nations in the areas now occupied has been based for centuries. In particu¬ 
lar, the destruction of all safeguards for the defendant in criminal procedure 
must be considered as a retrogression to those times when life and liberty 
of a citizen were at the mercy of the arbitrary practice of issuing lettres de 
cachet . In this regard the present organization of the courts represents a 
violation of Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, of which the essential re¬ 
quirement is that the occupant respect the legal institutions of the occupied 
country—a requirement which also implies that he should respect the organ¬ 
ization of the courts. 

20 As to the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, see decree of April 14, I 939 » below, 
P “See below, p. 448. 22 See decree of February 19, 194 °. below, p. 529. 



I. New Methods in Treatment of Property by the Occupant 

The occupant has introduced new methods in the treatment of property. 
They consist mainly of the unlimited expansion of the institution of seques¬ 
tration and compulsory administration, and the handling of property not 
only as a means for enrichment of the occupant but also for political purposes 
in the enforcement of the New Order. 

Sequestration by itself, according to the decree of the Commander in 
Chief of the German Army in Belgium, dated May 20, 1940, does not cancel 
ownership but restricts the right of the owner to dispose of his goods. 1 
However, the principle of sequestration as applied by the German occupant 
is frequently a preliminary step to confiscation, although a sequestrated 
property may also in some cases be released. Transfer of the sequestrated 
property to other persons can be undertaken only by special permission of 
the authorities and on condition that such transfer is in the interest of the 
“general economic welfare.” 2 Sequestrated property is as a rule put under 
the compulsory administration of special trustees ( Treuhdnder ), who report 
to special trust agencies called TreuJmndstellen. Sometimes, in excep¬ 
tional cases, the owner is allowed to act as manager of his own sequestrated 

That sequestration of property is considered by the occupant as a very 
important element of administration is obvious from the decree published 
in incorporated Poland on September 17, 1940. 3 According to this decree, 
severe penalties are imposed on persons withholding sequestrated items from 
German authorities. It is stated also in this decree that “if the culprit acts 
from opposition to the new political order, or if the case is particularly serious 
for some other reason, then the death penalty shall be imposed.” 4 A decree 
for the Government General of Poland confers upon the Superior S.S. and 
Police Chief the right to order sequestrations, with the object “of increasing 
the striking power of the units of the uniformed police and armed S.S.” 6 

To all practical purposes, sequestration for the duration amounts to 
confiscation because as a rule the owner is not allowed to participate either 
in the administration or in the profits of the property. Only in exceptional 
cases does he receive small amounts for subsistence, at the discretion of the 
administrator of the sequestrated property. As the owner may expect resti¬ 
tution only after the defeat of the occupant, the consequences of sequestra- 

1 See below, p. 321. * Ibid. 3 See below, p. 511. 

4 Ibid., Section 20. 6 See decree of January 24, 1940, below, p. 534. 




tion and of confiscation within the period of occupation are thus practically 

the same. . . 

The new methods introduced by the occupant in this war consist in fact 

in creating a system of removing properties from whole groups of the popula¬ 
tion, and in vesting the titles either in the German State, in Germans, or in 
other persons collaborating with Germany. In this way properties of mil¬ 
lions of Jews, Poles, Serbs, Frenchmen, Norwegians, Luxemburgers, Greeks, 
Czechs, and Belgians have been sequestrated and in great part confiscated. 

1. State Property. The occupant has confiscated not only movable state 
property but also real property belonging to the state, which latter action 
is a violation of Article 53 of the Hague Regulations. Moreover, in confis¬ 
cating state property the occupant has not limited himself to the use of the 
real property belonging to the state but has resorted to selling this property, 
which is also a violation of the above-mentioned Hague Regulations, Article 
55, since an occupant has only the right under that article to act as adminis¬ 
trator and usufructuary of realty belonging to the state; he cannot assume 
any title of ownership. 

Notwithstanding this provision, however, the Reich Commissioner for the 
Netherlands issued a decree on October 4, 1940,‘ which provided for the sell¬ 
ing of real property owned by the Dutch State. As under Dutch law 7 a 
secretary general of a ministry has no right to act as a seller of state property 
on his own authority, the Reich Commissioner has arbitrarily conferred 
such right upon the Secretary General of the Ministry of I* inance and has 
thus changed the basic laws of the Netherlands in order to enable him to 
transact sales of Dutch state property under the direction of the German 
authority.* The above-mentioned change in the basic laws of the Nether¬ 
lands is again a violation of Article 43 of the Hague Regulations, which states 
that the occupant shall respect the laws in force in the country "unless 
absolutely prevented.” Obviously, no question of military necessity is 
involved when the occupant engages in illegal property transactions simply 
for political New-Order reasons. In this particular case, properties were 
being sold to Germans and to pro-Nazi Dutchmen as a partial reward for 
their pro-Nazi activities. 

2. Private Properly. As to private property, the methods adopted for 
the countries occupied in the west differ from those employed in the territo¬ 
ries occupied in the east, especially Poland. In the former countries, private 
property is being sequestrated or confiscated mainly in order to force the 
population to collaborate with the New Order, whereas in Poland the aim of 
sequestration and confiscation is to deprive Poles of property and to give it to 

’lee actof’ August 29, 1848 ( Staatsblad , No. 39), as revised by act of April 8, 1937 (ibid., 

8 Apparently the occupant was eager to have the Dutch headless government appear as 
a seller of the Dutch state property, in order to create more confidence with the buyer. 



Germans. Thus, citizens of the Netherlands and of Luxemburg may be de¬ 
prived of their property if they do not wish to promote Germanism, whereas 
the Poles arc being deprived of their property for the mere reason that they 
are Poles and their property is needed for allocation to German settlers. 
The following decrees illustrate the above-mentioned methods: 

In Luxemburg a decree was promulgated on March i, 1941, by the 
Gauleiter and Chief of the Civil Administration, Section 1 of which reads: 

To enterprises of trade or industry whose management is unwilling to promote 
Germanism at all times and without any/eservations, the Chief of the Civil Adminis¬ 
tration may issue orders which will ensure the establishment of conditions in harmony 
with the fact of a German administration in Luxembourg. 

The same shall apply if the management of an enterprise in trade or industry fails 
to fulfill its duties arising from the general principles of a National Socialist Works' 
Community or violates orders and instructions of the Chief of the Civil Administra¬ 
tion or his designees. 

The Chief of the Civil Administration may by special order restrain managers of 
enterprises from exercising their authority, and by order define their legal position 
with regard to the enterprise, and may appoint in their stead commissioners who will 
exercise authority as required. These orders shall not be subject to review by courts 
of general jurisdiction. The cost arising from the activity of such commissioners shall 
be borne by the enterprise. 9 

In the Netherlands a decree was issued by the Reich Commissioner on 
July 4, 1940, 10 permitting confiscation of property not only for activities 
hostile to the German Reich or Germanism which are perpetrated or at¬ 
tempted but also in cases where “it must be assumed M that a person will 
in the future further activities hostile to the German Reich or Germany. 
Confiscation is thus based not on actual guilt only, but also upon the presump¬ 
tion of future guilt. This decree tends to create in the Dutch population 
a feeling of insecurity and fear, and a readiness to comply with every re¬ 
quest of the occupant. 

In the western part of Poland which was incorporated into the Reich, the 
lack of respect shown for private property is a mass phenomenon. The 
occupant is conferring on German nationals the ownership of Polish land, 
enterprises and even chattels, if the latter are sufficiently valuable. The 
decree of September 17, 1940, 11 permits mass sequestration and mass con¬ 
fiscation of property in Poland, under the assumption that the property is 
required for the “public welfare, particularly in the interests of Reich defense 
or the strengthening of Germanism/ 1 In taking over Polish properties, the 
Reich Commissioner for Strengthening Germanism has jurisdiction as re¬ 
gards agriculture, because the farms taken from the Poles are given to Ger¬ 
man settlers. That confiscation and sequestration tend to promote Ger¬ 
manism is obvious also from Section 13 of the above-mentioned decree of 
September 17, which states that sequestration must be suspended if the 

9 Verordnungsblatt, 1941, No. 17, p. 119. 

10 See below, p. 478. u See below, p. 511. 



owner of the property asserts that he is a German national. 12 Upon com¬ 
parison of the provision in Article 46 of the Hague Regulations—that private 
property must be respected and cannot be confiscated—with the texts of 
the above-mentioned German decrees on the treatment of property, the 
illegality of the confiscations and sequestrations becomes so obvious that 
further discussion is unnecessary. 

3. Control of Transactions in Property . Because the occupant treats 
property as a means of political control, transactions in property, especially 
of the more important character, are licensed. Control introduced over 
such transactions embraces such items as food, raw materials, agricultural 
products, half-manufactured materials, and other supplies. The decree of 
the Commander in Chief of the German Army in the West of May 20, 1940, 
concerning sequestration, made transactions in these goods, with certain 
exceptions, subject to the consent of the Army Group in the territories of 
the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, and France. 18 In the territories 
occupied during the present Russo-German war, transactions in real estate 
as well as transactions involving acquisition of enterprises or shares therein 
are subject to license by German authorities. 

4. Buying Devices. Because of the overvaluation of German currency in 
relation to local currencies, which were themselves inflated as a result of 
German economic pressure, the Germans acquired a predominant position in 
buying private enterprises. Thus, many enterprises belonging to inhabitants 
of the occupied countries were acquired by Germans either totally or to the 
extent of at least 51 per cent, in many instances by the use of duress. As 
freedom of contract, as well as the theory of just price (under the doctrine of 
laesio enormis ), is an essential element of the laws in the various occupied 
countries, these buying devices are to be considered as a disregard of the rules 
relating to private property as defined in Article 46 of the Hague Regulations. 

5. The Occupant and the Communistic System of Property. That private 
ownership is not an institution respected, as such, by National Socialism in 
general and by the German occupant in particular, is obvious from the treat¬ 
ment of private property in the Ostland. In the first proclamations issued 
by the German armies when they occupied Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia 
(held at that time by Russia), the restoration of private property was prom¬ 
ised to the local population as a “means of returning to the manner of life 
adapted to a civilized society.” However, the occupant soon discovered 
that the collectivization of property which had in the meantime been in¬ 
troduced by Russia was useful to the Germans. The collective farms 
(kolhozy) or state farms ( sovhozy ) and the institutions of industrial concen¬ 
tration, such as the combines, cartels, and trusts, provided the German war 
economy with centralization of control. The occupant was therefore reluc- 

12 On the treatment of property, see also below, chapters on “The Legal Status of the 
Jews” and “Poland." 

12 See below, p. 321. 



taut to accept the idea of restoration. In regulations issued under a decree 
of October 17, 1941, 14 the Commissioner General in Riga announced that 
in order to avoid excessive disturbances in the normal economic life by the 
measures taken for restoration of private property, the liquidation of the 
Bolshevik system should take place step by step only. Accordingly, an 
order of November 29, 1941, concerning economic reconstruction in the 
Ostland, declares it unlawful for economic enterprises, as well as for agricul¬ 
tural and forestry establishments, to separate themselves from their existing 
state economic organizations without permission. Nevertheless, a return 
to private property was later announced in the regulations issued by the 
Commissioner General in Riga, dated December 16 and December 23, 1941. 
The main purpose of these decrees and regulations is not, however, the 
establishment of the legal institution of private property but rather the 
creation of an incentive for the local population to serve German interests 
to a greater degree. Not every dispossessed owner may be reestablished in 
ownership; rather, he is to be so reestablished only if he proves to be a quali¬ 
fied manager of the enterprise who will be useful for the same enterprise in 
the German war economy. The candidate for admission to the right to 
hold private property must submit the necessary papers or otherwise prove 
that he has been active for at least five years in a given profession. In 
corroboration of professional suitability the candidate may be required to 
pass an examination. 146 


As a result of the practices of the occupant, property in Europe has been 
deprived of legal foundations and has become an object of utilitarian ad¬ 
ministrative techniques. Therefore it may be stated that not only have 
the rules of the Hague Convention been violated, but also its main purpose, 
which consists in safeguarding the accepted principles of morality and social 
order, to which the people of most of the occupied countries adhered and 
of which respect for private property is an essential part. Social philoso¬ 
phers and statesmen must watch carefully the phenomenon of the destruc¬ 
tion of the institution of private property in Europe in the present war, which 
may become even more extensive if the war is prolonged and may prove 
significant for future developments in the post-war period. 

II. Plan for Restitution of Property after Liberation 

Every military occupation has as a consequence changes in property rela¬ 
tions, and after every war adjustments of titles have been necessary. The 
government of the occupied country, upon regaining control of its territory, 
enacts laws and regulations for the purposes of such adjustments. In the 

14 See below, p. 308. 

14 »See also “Return to Private Property” in chapter on the “Baltic States,” below, 
pp. 120-23. 



first World War, changes of title to ownership effected under political pres¬ 
sure or by reason of military contingencies in occupied France and in occu¬ 
pied Belgium were not recognized by French and Belgian authorities after 
the occupation, and special laws were passed invalidating contracts involving 
property entered into during the occupation period. 15 Illegal measures of 
dispossession, devices in buying up properties, as well as the use of duress in 
the reconveying of titles in territories under German occupation during 
the present war caused the United Nations to issue a declaration on January 
5, 1943, in which they reserved their right “to declare invalid any transfers 
of, or dealings with, property, rights and interests” in territories under enemy 
occupation. 16 Even before that date several governments-in-exile had issued 
decrees to the effect that measures as to property adopted by the occupying 
power were to be considered null and void. Such decrees were issued by 
the Belgian Government on January 10, 1941, the Polish Government on 
November 30, 1939, and by the Yugoslav Government under date of May 
28, 1942. 17 

The problem of the restitution of property 18 after the present war will 
be complicated because of the changes in title amounting to millions of 
cases and the great variety of the techniques and devices applied by the 
occupant. It is not too soon to prepare a detailed plan for the restitution 
of such property. The author sees the main features of such a plan as 

I. Transactions with the Occupant and with Other Persons. One should 
make an essential distinction between, on the one hand, transactions and 
transfers of property entered into by the inhabitants of an occupied country 

16 As to France, see “ Loi relative aux saisies et ventes effectuees en pays ennemi, dans les 
territoires occupes par l’ennemi et en Alsace-Lorraine,” November 8, 1917 (Journal Of - 
ficiel, November n, 1917), in Legislation de la Guerre de IQ14 (Paris: L. Tenin, [1915-19]), 
Vol. 8, p. 123. 

16 Declaration regarding Forced Transfers of Property in Enemy-controlled Territory: 

“The Union of South Africa, the United States of America, Australia, Belgium, Canada, 

China, the Czechoslovak Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern 
Ireland, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Greece, India, Luxembourg, the Nether¬ 
lands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Yugoslavia and the French National Committee: 

“Hereby issue a formal warning to all concerned, and in particular to persons in neutral 
countries, that they intend to do their utmost to defeat the methods of dispossession prac¬ 
ticed by the governments with which they are at war against the countries and peoples who 
have been so wantonly assaulted and despoiled. 

“Accordingly the governments making this declaration and the French National Commit¬ 
tee reserve all their rights to declare invalid any transfers of, or dealings with, property, 
rights and interests of any description whatsoever which arc, or have been, situated in the 
territories which have come under the occupation or control, direct or indirect, of the govern¬ 
ments with which they are at war or which belong or have belonged, to persons, including 
juridical persons, resident in such territories. This warning applies whether such transfers 
or dealings have taken the form of open looting or plunder, or of transactions apparently 
legal in form, even when they purport to be voluntarily effected. 

“The governments making this declaration and the French National Committee solemnly 
record their solidarity in this matter.” Department of State, Bulletin , Vol. VIII, No. 185 
(January 9, 1943 ). PP- 21-22. 

17 See, respectivelv, the MoniU'ur Beige (London), February 25, 1941; Dziennik Ustaw, 
December 2, 1939, fro. 102; and Slu'zbcne Novine, June 18, 1942, No. 7. 

18 By property we mean also interests and rights. 



with the occupant himself or persons vested by the occupant with special 
rights (as for example German citizens or Volksdeutsche) and, on the other 
hand, transactions and transfers entered into between inhabitants of the 
occupied countries among themselves . 19 In transactions of the first category 
the element of duress is usually to be presumed. In transactions of the 
second category more care must be taken in determining the real nature of 
the motives, because under occupation the inhabitants may carry on normal 
transactions in property as between themselves in accordance with pre-war 
standards. Therefore, transactions of the first kind should as a general 
rule be declared void ex officio, while transactions of the second kind may 
be declared void only on petition of the interested party and after special 

Moreover, because of practical reasons, a distinction should likewise be 
made between properties carried into Germany and changes In properties 
within the limits of one occupied territory. This distinction is important 
because of its effect on the procedures to be adopted in the restitution. 

2. Restitution of Property Carried into Germany. This property includes 
valuable chattels such as paintings and other objects of art, precious an¬ 
tiquities, libraries, scientific laboratories, valuable papers such as securities, 
and so on. Such objects should be taken away from the last possessor, 
whether that possessor is the German State or an individual. If the ob¬ 
jects carried away cannot be traced to the actual possessor In Germany, 
the last-known German possessor should be given a fixed period of time 
within which to return the property or its equivalent in the form either of 
specie or a similar property which he should be compelled to provide. If 
there is evidence that the Germans took away from Poland, for example, 
art treasures from one of its galleries, they should be required to return 
them within a certain period of time, for example, three months. A German 
art gallery of similar value should in the meantime be seized as collateral. 
If within the given time these art treasures are not restored, then the col¬ 
lateral should be taken from Germany. Another example may illustrate 
such a plan. There is evidence, for instance, that a member of the Wehr- 
macht has taken valuable rugs from Greece. If this person can be traced, 
and the rugs are still in his possession, they should be taken from him. If 
the rugs cannot be traced, an attachment should be made on the property of 
the culprit in Germany until the rugs in question are restored or objects in 
kind of equivalent value are received. If the member of the German 
Wehrmacht docs not own any property, attachment may be made at a given 
time on his earnings within the limitations of actual possibility. The reasons 
for advocating such a procedure are the following: 

(a) German currency being based at present on political power, it will 

19 Mutatis mutandis , the same distinction should apply as to other occupants, as, for 
example, Hungarians, Italians, Rumanians, Bulgarians, and Albanians. 



crumble on the day of Germany's defeat, and therefore reparations in money 
on the part of the state or of individuals would seem to be impractical. 

(b) The looters should be subject to such a procedure for exemplary 
purposes. The removal of a valuable painting from the home of a looter may 
create in his family a lasting impression and feeling as to responsibility for 
loot and crime. 

3. Restitution of Property within the Limits of One Occupied Territory. 
Although in the case of property carried away to Germany the nature of 
the title is irrelevant, and loot or duress in acquisition can be presumed as a 
rule, changes in title among inhabitants of the same occupied country must 
be considered from the point of view of whether political pressure or political 
considerations in general have prevailed in the transaction involved. One 
must distinguish between political pressure and political considerations as 
motives for given transactions. The following examples will serve to illus¬ 
trate the need for this distinction: If a Quislingite has used his political 
connections in order to compel a fellow countryman to sell him his property, 
such an act was undertaken under political pressure and should be declared 
invalid. On the other hand, a situation may occur wherein a non-collabora¬ 
tionist, in anticipation of the probable confiscation of his property because 
of his political activities, has sold it in advance to a person not involved in 
political activities in any way whatsoever. In the latter instance, the 
original owner should be given the opportunity of rescinding the transaction 
by repaying the money, whereas in the case of the Quislingite it would be 
only just that the original owner repay the money, not to the Quislingite 
but to a special state fund to be established. 

4. Acquisition by Neutral Countries , Other Occupied Countries , or Axis 
Countries other tiian Germany. During the present war, the German occu¬ 
pant or his agents have been engaged in selling properties and interests to 
neutral countries, to other occupied countries, or to other Axis countries. 
The rights of an occupant in occupied territory being governed by the Hague 
Regulations, to which most of the countries of the world have adhered, the 
validity of such transfers of property can be considered only within the 
framework of international law. The occupant, having violated the Hague 
Regulations, possesses an invalid title to those properties and rights which it 
thus illegally acquired and therefore cannot transfer any valid title to other 
persons. Nemo plus juris transferre potest quam ipse habebat. All countries 
which recognize international law, and especially the parties to the Hague 
Convention, cannot recognize any acts committed in violation of that Conven¬ 
tion. Consequently, such properties ought to be restored to their owners. 20 

20 See in this respect resolutions of the London International Law Conference, 1943, 
based, among others, upon a paper read by A. Raestad, “How far can belligerent occupation 
create a valid title of acquisition of rights transferable outside the occupied country and 
that of the occupant? " See W. R. Bisschop, “London International Law Conference 1943," 
London Quarterly of World y\ fairs, Vol. IX, No. 2 (October, 1943), pp. 73-77. 



5. The Problem of Good Faith in Acquisition and Repayment of the Price. 
The question arises whether acquisition by the last possessor may involve 
the plea of good faith. In view of the fact that during the present war loot¬ 
ing and other techniques of dispossession have become a mass practice and 
are of common knowledge, and that warnings on the part of the Allied Gov¬ 
ernments have also been issued, 21 the plea of good faith in the acquisition of 
such properties cannot be taken into consideration in the same way as would 
be the case under normal conditions. 

It is advisable to amplify this summary statement of the reasons which 
militate against the admission of the plea of good faith in the situation 
created by the present war. Loot and other techniques of dispossession have 
become a mass phenomenon, as has been mentioned, and are of common 
knowledge not only to the inhabitants of one occupied country but also to 
the inhabitants of other occupied countries and of neutral countries, as 
well as of other Axis countries which are following the German pattern in 
the territories occupied by them. Such common knowledge is based upon 
concrete evidence and also upon laws promulgated by the occupant. In 
addition, one should take into consideration the fact that in every occupied 
country dealings in real estate and in securities labeled in foreign currency 
are prohibited except with permission of the occupant. Consequently, the 
person who offers to sell such property must be in possession of permission 
from the German authorities. Since such permission is given only to per¬ 
sons collaborating with the Germans or assisting them in their loot, the 
acquirer knows that the seller is an accomplice of the occupant. The num¬ 
ber of other properties and chattels in which transactions are dependent on 
permission varies from country to country, but transactions in most valuable 
objects, such as paintings, jewelry, gold, silver, and platinum, are subject 
to such permission in all the occupied countries. If one combines the 
problem of common knowledge regarding loot and property devices with 
the regimentation of transactions in property, and if one takes into con¬ 
sideration also the warning issued by the United Nations as to the acquisi¬ 
tion of such properties, one must come to the conclusion that the plea of 
good faith cannot be admitted. Only in exceptional cases could the last 
possessor invoke that plea on the ground of exclusion from common knowl¬ 
edge. For example, if a person had spent a long time in a hospital in a 
serious condition and had been offered such property for purchase the day 
he left the hospital, not knowing about the mass dispossession practices of 
the occupant, he might properly plead good faith in acquisition. The 
practical significance of such exception would obviously be nil. 22 In this 

91 See declaration on property, above, p. 41. 

95 That this seems to be,the view of the London International Law Conference is indicated 
in its Resolution 7: “A person who acquires, even in good faith, any property, rights or in¬ 
terests which are or have been situated in occupied territory or are the property of nationals 
of that country will, if his acquisition of them is derived directly or indirectly from acts of 



connection, the problem arises whether the last possessor is entitled to claim 
from the original owner reimbursement of the sum he has paid for the prop¬ 
erty involved. The Belgian law of May 31, 1917, concerning measures of 
dispossession effected by the enemy, provided that the owner could never 
be compelled to pay to the last possessor the price which that possessor had 
paid. The latter would have a claim only against the person who conveyed 
the title to him. 23 Such a provision would seem to provide an adequate 
solution also in the present situation. 

6. The Problem of the Colonists. The problem of the colonists is specific 
because many thousands of them have been settled on properties of dispos¬ 
sessed persons. 24 The fact that many of them, especially those coming from 
the Baltic States, Transylvania, and Bukovina, were moved against their 
will, may exclude their penal responsibility in assisting the enemy in acts of 
dispossession but does not provide any valid title to the property on which 
they are settled. In cases where colonists have been settled on state prop¬ 
erty, the legal situation remains the same. The occupant has the right only 
to the usufruct of real property belonging to the state in the occupied coun¬ 
try; he has no right to dispose of such property and convey title to it to 
other persons. Consequently, the property given by the occupant to the 
colonists should be returned to the original owners. 

7. The Responsibilities of the Administrators of Sequestrated Property. 
The administrators ( Treuhander) of the property seized are predominantly 
of three groups: (1) Germans imported from Germany proper ( Reichs - 
deutsche) ; (2) Germans who lived in the occupied country before the invasion 
( Volksdeutsche) ; and (3) local “Quislings." Because the first two types of 
persons were those in whom the occupant had particular confidence and be¬ 
cause rewards had to be given to the traitors who constituted the third type, 
it was to these persons that the occupant entrusted the administration of 
the property of individuals who would not promote Germanism. 23 A volun¬ 
tary element is unquestionably involved here, since there can be no doubt 
that most, if not all, such administrators have willingly accepted possession 
and control of the seized properties. This voluntary element in recruiting 
administrators must lead us to the conclusion that the administrators should 
not only be held responsible personally (for their participation in war crimes) 
but should also be held responsible in their property for damages to the se- 

the occupant or his associates or agents, not acciuire an internationally valid title thereto 
as against the true owner unless such title is valid by the law of the occupied country as ap¬ 
plied by the reconstituted authorities after the liberation of the country.” Bisschop, op. 

Ct « SeJArticle 3 of the decree-law of May 31, 1917. Arrite-loi relatif aux mesures dc depos- 
session effectides par Venne.mi , in Moniteur Beige, May 27-June 2, 1917. 

24 During 1943 the number of colonists was increased by the fact of mass raids over Ger¬ 
many, which resulted in removing great numbers of German families from bomb-stricken 
areas, especially from Berlin to Poland. These newcomers were given properties which had 
been confiscated from Poles. 

24 See above, pp. 37-38* 

4 6 


questrated properties. It should be stated that in many instances, the ad¬ 
ministrators of sequestrated property are financially solvent men in their 
own right, and would therefore be in a position to make compensation for 
such damages. Attachments should be immediately entered on their real 
and personal property as soon as may be possible. 

8. Restitution Agencies and Tribunals. As to the problem of the agencies 
which should be entrusted with the restitution of property and of the pro¬ 
cedure to be adopted, the following factors should be taken into consid¬ 
eration : 

The number of cases will be very high, surpassing all imaginable figures. 
Because of the magnitude of the problem, precedents based on the practice of 
the past will be of little avail in reaching a solution. It would be impossible 
to handle such a large task expeditiously through ordinary court action. 
Judicial procedure alone would be too slow; and in any event the courts and 
judges may well be insufficient in number and judicial systems badly dis¬ 
organized. 26 In addition, the handling of property cases requires a great 
deal of preliminary investigation of a highly specialized nature, in the 
political, financial, and technical fields. On the whole, therefore, adminis¬ 
trative procedure would be more appropriate for such investigations than 
judicial procedure. 

Changes in property relations affect not only the inhabitants of one occu¬ 
pied country but also the inhabitants of other occupied, and even neutral, 
countries—and certainly the inhabitants of Germany itself. Therefore, it 
should not be overlooked that restitution of property is a problem of inter¬ 
national dimensions. 

9. Property Restitution Agencies . In consideration of these factors, the 
author proposes the creation of an international agency for handling the 
problems involving the restitution of property. Such an agency could be 
called “International Property Restitution Agency” 27 and should have na¬ 
tional autonomous branch agencies in each country affected called “Prop¬ 
erty Restitution Agency of. Country X.” To the extent that the size of 
the country and the number of cases so required, the national agencies 
should have branch agencies in the cities and counties, which should apply 
the same rules of procedure as the national agendes. 

A delimitation of the jurisdiction of the various national agencies, on the 
one hand, and of the international agency, on the other hand, should be 

M It happens sometimes that as a result of military operations the judges are removed 
by the military power from a given territory. This happened, for example (although under 
different circumstances) during the occupation of Palestine by the British when the Turks 
removed all judges in order to hamper the administration of the country. See Norman 
Bentwich, “'] he Legal Administration of Palestine under the British Military Occupation/' 
British Yearbook of International Law, 1020-1921, pp. 139-43. 

,7 The author of this work has used the name International Trust Company in previous 
statements for the same institution. See Proceedings of the Forty-Fourth Annual Session of 
the North Carolina Bar Association; held at The Carolina, Pinehurst, N. C., May 15, 16, 17, 
1942 , p. 116. 



carefully planned. The national agency should handle, as a rule, cases 
of restitution of property as between the inhabitants of its own country. 
The international agency should handle cases involving more than one coun¬ 
try. It should certainly deal with all cases involving neutral countries and 
especially with those involving Germany, because Germany will be subject 
to claims from many countries. A special procedure should be elaborated 
for particularly close cooperation between the international agency and na¬ 
tional agencies which are interested in a specific case of international im¬ 
portance involving the inhabitants of their respective countries. For ex¬ 
ample, property belonging to a Luxemburg citizen may have been transferred 
to France. The international agency should cooperate in this particular 
case with the Luxemburg national agency, and also with the French agency. 
If Belgian property has been transferred to Germany, the international 
agency should cooperate with the Belgian agency in handling this case. 
On the other hand, where an illegal transfer of property has taken place 
between the inhabitantsof the Netherlands, forinstance, only the Netherlands 
national agency should handle the case. 

A specific problem arises as to the cooperation between the international 
agency and a neutral country. It would be desirable that the neutral 
countries should join an international plan for restitution of property. 
Indeed, collaboration of neutrals in the plan seems imperative because the 
German occupant has sold or otherwise transferred properties from occupied 
countries to neutral countries. Such a cooperation should be sanctioned by 
international agreement, which should provide also for the creation of prop¬ 
erty restitution agencies in neutral countries; or at least the neutral countries 
should allow the International Property Restitution Agency to establish its 
agents in their countries with special staffs to act as liaison officers between 
the agency and the authorities or inhabitants of the neutral countries. 

The national and international property restitution agencies should em¬ 
ploy administrative officials on their staffs and should apply administrative 
procedures. They should make investigations, through special investiga¬ 
tors, into the background of the property transactions involved. In order 
to prevent changes in property before final decisions are made, the respective 
agency should be entitled to issue orders and regulations, especially concern¬ 
ing the freezing of property status for a given period. The agency should 
also be vested with the right to issue attachments on properties. 

The procedure in the case of the national property restitution agencies, 
following the completion of the investigation, should be as follows: The in¬ 
vestigator should submit the case to a special committee within the agency, 
which would then render a final decision on the restitution of title and rescis¬ 
sion of the contract, as well as on other changes in the status of the property. 
Such a committee, which may be called “Property Restitution Commit¬ 
tee,” should be composed of three members, of which two should be members 

4 8 


of the staff of the Property Restitution Agency and the third a judge who 
should be permanently connected with the committee and preside over it. 
However, provision should be made to the effect that, whereas the agency 
should not be limited in the scope of its investigations as to property rela¬ 
tions, it should be limited as to the kind of cases in which it can render final 
decisions affecting the status of property. In the opinion of the author, it 
would be in accordance with the legal traditions of the respective countries 
if the Property Restitution Committee were empowered to render final 
decisions only in the smaller and simpler cases, whereas changes in title 
in the more complicated cases or in those representing larger amounts 
should be decided by the Restitution Tribunals described below. More¬ 
over, in order to assure uniformity in judicial action and to stress judicial 
guaranties in the procedure of the property restitution committees, an ar¬ 
rangement should be made to the effect that the presiding judge of the Prop¬ 
erty Restitution Committee may always, at his discretion, refer the case 
before the committee to the respective Restitution Tribunal. Such a 
submission of the case could take place if the presiding judge does not agree 
with the opinion of the two lay members of the committee or if he thinks 
that the case is complicated for any reason, or if a matter of principle is 

The organization of, and procedure to be applied by, the International 
Property Restitution Agency should be similar to that of the national 
agency with one exception, that no Property Restitution Committee should 
be created in such agency because international cases by their nature are 
more complicated and they should always be determined by decision of the 
International Restitution Tribunal, described below, connected with the in¬ 
ternational agency. 

io. Property Restitution Tribunals. As mentioned above, it seems to be 
appropriate that final decision as to all international cases, and the more 
involved national cases, should be rendered by tribunals composed of judges. 
These tribunals should be organized as autonomous benches within the inter¬ 
national agency and the national property restitution agencies. The tribu¬ 
nal could have a small or large number of judges depending on the number of 
cases, but it should always render decisions in benches composed of three 
judges. As to the national agencies, the cases in which final decisions as to 
restitution should as a rule be rendered by such tribunals rather than by 
the committees, are, for example, in the view of the author, those involving 
the following: (a) real property ( b ) corporations; (c) chattels of a high value 
(to be specifically defined); and (d) in addition, every other case that the 
presiding judge of the property restitution committee of the agency shall 
deem appropriate to transfer for final decision to the tribunal. As regards 
the International Agency, all property restitution decisions should be ren¬ 
dered by the International Tribunal. The International Tribunal should 



be composed of experts in international law and persons who have had ex¬ 
perience in international tribunals, international arbitration courts, etc. 

To sum up: A National Property Restitution Agency would consist of 
three elements: (a) investigators; ( b ) Property Restitution Committee; 
(c) Property Restitution Tribunal. The International Property Restitu¬ 
tion Agency would consist of two elements: (a) investigators; ( b ) the In¬ 
ternational Property Restitution Tribunal. The investigation as to prop¬ 
erty relations, as well as all attachments, would always be carried out by 
the national or international property restitution agency. In the case of a 
national agency, the final restitution decisions would be rendered in the less 
complicated cases by a property restitution committee of the agency, and 
in the more complicated cases, by a tribunal constituting an autonomous 
part of the agency. In cases before the International Property Restitution 
Agency, the tribunal of that agency would have exclusive jurisdiction in 
rendering final decisions in view of the more complicated nature of interna¬ 
tional cases. Moreover, if the international agency is cooperating with a 
national agency in cases involving that country and another country, the 
international tribunal, and not the national tribunal, should render the final 

Detailed procedural measures should be worked out in advance by an 
international commission. It is suggested that the following points of 
procedure should be borne in mind by such a commission: 

(a) Time is of the essence in the post-war settlement of property cases, 
and, in order to heal as quickly as possible the wounds of war and not to 
disrupt the economic life by prolonged mass trials in civil cases, the deci¬ 
sions of property restitution committees and tribunals should be final. 

(b) The records prepared by the investigators of the restitution agencies 
should be relied on as much as possible by the committees and tribu¬ 
nals, and the hearing of witnesses should be limited to the most essential 



German Practices and the Plea of Military Necessity 

Considered with reference to the well-established practices of civilized 
nations and the law as sanctioned by the letter and spirit of the Hague 
Regulations, the r 61 e of finance under German occupation has been com¬ 
pletely reversed. An occupant is entitled, on the one hand, to undertake 
such measures in the financial field as will restore and ensure public order 
(which term also implies order in the financial relations of the population in 
question), and, on the other hand, to collect taxes, levies, and money con¬ 
tributions for the needs of the army or for the administration of the terri¬ 
tory under occupation. The fact that such operations arc sanctioned by 
law and custom presupposes that the financial resources of the occupied 
country—with the exception of “cash, funds, and realizable securities which 
are strictly the property of the State” (Article 53 of the Hague Regula¬ 
tions)—should be respected and serve the purposes of maintaining and 
ensuring order in the financial relations’of its population. Accordingly, 
the financial resources of an occupied country as a whole should remain 
with the population of that country, and only a part of such resources may 
be appropriated by the occupant, subject to the above-mentioned limita¬ 
tions of the Hague Regulations. The German occupant, as stated above, 
has completely reversed this picture by taking over practically the whole 
of the financial resources of the occupied country and leaving to the popula¬ 
tion only a small part. In engaging in such practices the German occupant 
can hardly invoke the plea of military necessity because what he is under¬ 
taking is not merely a procedure of appropriation for the needs of the occu¬ 
pation forces but rather a mass exploitation and mass looting both for the 
needs of the German economy as a whole and for political purposes. That 
such is the case is seen from the application to the occupied countries of the 
German Four-Year Plan, 1 under which the administration of the economy of 
the occupied countries is mainly carried out. Formally speaking, the Four- 
Year Plan is a German institution developed in the pre-war period; it serves 
the economic needs of the German nation and not especially the needs of an 
occupying army in the sense of the Hague Convention. 

In studying the actual financial setup under German occupation, it is not 
alone the measures relating to contributions, levies, and requisitions which 

1 See decree of the Fiihrer and Chancellor of the Reich of October 12, I 939 » for the Govern¬ 
ment General of Poland, below, p. 522. 




are important; of even greater significance is the problem of the mechanism 
which has been created and developed in taking over the whole of the finan¬ 
cial resources of the countries in question. The main elements of that 
mechanism are described in the paragraphs which follow. 

I. Currency 

1. German Currency. In the first period of occupation the German 
troops used special certificates as legal tender, called Reichskreditkassen- 
scheine, in all the occupied countries. 1 * 1 These certificates were used as legal 
tender in the occupied territories only, and there was a prohibition against 
importing them into Germany. They were issued by the Central Office 
of the Reich Credit Institutes ( Reichskreditkassen ), which is located in 
Berlin. This office is headed and managed by a directorial board consisting 
of at least two persons, and is supervised by a board of governors. The 
directorial board is appointed by the board of governors. Members of this 
board are: a deputy of the Minister of Finance, a deputy of the Minister of 
Economy, a deputy of the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces (in 
order to keep in contact with the needs of the occupying armies), a repre¬ 
sentative of the commander in chief of each army of occupation, as well 
as members to be appointed by the President of the German Reichstag. 
The Reich Credit Institute in Berlin issues bills and coins. The bills and 
paper money are issued in denominations of fifty, twenty, five, and one 
Reichsmark, as well as fifty pfennigs. The coins are issued in amounts of 
ten and five pfennigs. An indication as to the amount issued may be 
found in the provision of the order of May 18, 1940, concerning Reich 
Credit Institutes, 2 to the effect that the Central Office may extend to the 
German Reich a loan not exceeding three billion Reichsmarks. Actually 
the Germans transgressed this limit as early as 1941, and in 1942 the 
amount of Reich Credit Institute notes issued was as high as five billion 
marks. 2 * 

The local Reich Credit Institutes created in the occupied countries act as 
agencies of the Central Office in Berlin. 2 They are also authorized to 
regulate money and credit transactions in the occupied territories, and in 
particular to carry on the following business: 

»» The German Reichsmark could not be used at all in Belgium. This shows a difference 
between the present occupation and that of 1914-18, when the Germans used also their own 
mark. e . 

* Application of orders concerning the Reich Credit Institutes to the occupied territories 
of Belgium, Luxemburg, France, and the Netherlands. See below, p. 329. 

*•See Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report , 1st April 1941-315! 
March 1942 (Basle, 1942), p. 129. 

* The Reich Credit Institutes “which closely followed the German Army in the field, were 
manned by Reichsbank personnel (although the institutions were, of course, completely sepa¬ 
rate) and the management of the circulation of Rcichskreditkasscnscheine and their withdrawal 
were thus supervised by Reichsbank staff.** Bank for International Settlements, Eleventh 
Annual Report, 1st April 1940-31st March 1941 (Basle, 1941), p. 1 79 - 



a) Purchase and sell promissory notes and checks bearing the names of 

usually three, but not less than two, persons known to be solvent 
and assuming responsibility for these notes or checks. Notes shall 
mature not later than six months from the date of purchase. 

b ) Make loans for interest, usually for a period not exceeding six months, 

provided that due collateral is furnished. 

c) Receive money without interest for purposes of transfer or deposit. 

d) Transact any bank business, especially collection of promissory 

notes and other documents. 

e) Accept for safe-deposit articles of value, especially securities. 

The Reich Credit Institute currency was withdrawn at different periods 
in most of the occupied countries. The local central banking institutions 
were compelled by the occupant to exchange them into local currency. 
Thus, the local institutions of the occupied territories were forced to finance 
the invasion (see below). 

2. Local Currencies. As to local currencies, a distinction was made 
between the incorporated areas and the non-incorporated areas. In the 
incorporated areas the local currencies were abolished and the Reichsmark 
was introduced as sole legal tender. The following exchange rates were set 
up in these areas for the exchange of the local currencies into German 

i Reichsmark = 1.50 Austrian schillings 
1 Reichsmark = 8.34 Czech crowns in the Sudeten 
1 Reichsmark = 10.0 Czech crowns in the Protectorate 

of Bohemia and Moravia 
1 Reichsmark = 2.0 Polish zlotys 
1 Reichsmark = 1.43 Danzig gulden 
1 Reichsmark = 2.50 Lithuanian lit 3 * 

1 Reichsmark = 10.0 Luxemburg francs 

In the non-incorporated countries the following rate was established: 

1 Reichsmark = 2.0 Danish crowns 
1 Reichsmark = 1.67 Norwegian crowns 
1 Reichsmark = 0.75 Dutch gulden 
1 Reichsmark = 12.50 Belgian francs 
1 Reichsmark = 20.0 French francs 
1 Reichsmark = 20.0 Yugoslav dinars 
1 Reichsmark = 10.0 Slovakian crowns 
1 Reichsmark = 20.0 Croatian kuna 
1 Reichsmark = 10.0 Russian rubles 
1 Reichsmark = 10.0 Ukrainian carbovanets 

In comparison with pre-war exchange rates (before the invasion) the 
Reichsmark was generally overvalued in relation to the currencies of occupied 

As applied in Memel Territory. 



This overvaluation creates for the occupant an additional purchasing 
power and allows him to obtain possession of the resources of the country 
at low prices. Moreover, the prices are also kept low through rigid price 
control. Thus the occupant, though he pays from time to time for goods 
and properties, enriches himself by the difference between the real prices 
and the artificial prices established through the above-mentioned devices. 
These devices amount, in consequence, to hidden contributions or requisi¬ 
tions, which are prohibited by Article 52 of the Hague Regulations. 4 

II. Central Banks and Currency Services 

For the creation of legal tender in terms of local currency new banks of 
issue were instituted in the occupied countries as follows: 

By the decree of December 15, 1939,* an issue bank was established in 
the Government General of Poland. The new bank is directed by a 
*Polish president and deputies appointed by the Governor General, together 
with the German bank governor (Bankdirigent ), who controls all the opera¬ 
tions of the bank, especially with regard to the opening of credits and the 
fixing of interest rates. The bank issues its own notes, denominated in 
zlotys. The notes of the former Bank Polski and the notes issued by the 
Reich Credit Institutes have been gradually withdrawn. According to the 
decree concerning the Bank of Issue in Poland of December 15, 1939, cover¬ 
age for the new notes was to include not only claims arising from discount 
and credit business, and German legal tender, as well as accounts maintained 
with the German Reichsbank or the German Verrechnungskasse (Clearing 
Office), but also a mortgage up to the amount of three billion zlotys on all 
real estate in the territory, with priority over all tax claims and other en¬ 

In Belgium a new bank of issue was constituted at Brussels on 3 une 27, 
1940, by a decree of the German military commander for Belgium and 
Northern France.’ The bank, which is a joint stock company under Bel¬ 
gian law, has a capital of 150 million Belgian francs, subscribed by the 
Belgian commercial banks. It is noteworthy that the German currency, 
including notes of the Reich Credit Institutes, as well as credits with 
the German Reichsbank, are admitted as cover for the bank of issue in 

After the occupation of Yugoslavia and the division of the occupied 
territory into two states, Serbia (under German military administration) 
and Croatia (a puppet state previously under Italian protection and lately 
under German control), two new banks of issue were created in these terri- 

4 {he well-documented book of Ernst Feilchenfeld, The International Kconomic Law of 
Belligerent Occupation (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1942). 

6 See below, p. 537. * Ibid., p. 539, 7 See below, p. 334, 



tories to replace the former National Bank of Yugoslavia, which was forced 
into liquidation on May 29, 1941. On the same day a decree was issued 
establishing the Serbian National Bank, with headquarters in Belgrade. 

I he new bank is under the direct control of the German Plenipotentiary 
for Economic Affairs, who appoints the Serbian governing directors; in 
addition, a German commissioner ( Bankdirigent) acts in the Serbian Na¬ 
tional Bank, and without his approval no important transactions may be 
made. This bank proceeded to exchange all Yugoslav dinars and Reich 
Credit Institute notes for new Serbian dinars. The Serbian State handed 
over to the bank debt certificates to the amount of the notes exchanged. 
Thus the Serbian State, with the help of the Serbian National Bank, fi¬ 
nanced the first stages of German occupation, because the Reich Institute 
notes were exchanged, not into Reichsmarks but into new Serbian dinars. 8 

In the puppet state of Croatia, the Croatian State Bank was established 
by the decree of the Chief of the Croatian State under date of May io,* 
1 94 1 • 9 The new bank issued a new currency (kuna). This bank also ex¬ 
changed the old Yugoslav dinar notes and Reichskreditkassenscheine for the 
new kuna notes. Thus the Croatian State Bank was likewise compelled to 
finance the first stage of the German occupation. 

In the Ostland the privilege of note issue remains with the Reich Credit 
Institutes. Thus the Reich Credit notes, as well as Russian rubles, are 
legal tender. All general business for the economic reconstruction of the 
Ostland is carried out by a specially created Gemeinschaftsbank with head¬ 
quarters in Riga. 

I11 the Reich Commissariat of the Ukraine a new Ukraine Central Bank 
was created on March 5, 1942, with headquarters at Rovno, in the Polish 
eastern province of Wolhynia. This bank issued a new currency, carbova- 
nets (the old name of Ukrainian currency). The new notes are guaranteed, 
like the zlotys in the Polish Government General, by a general mortgage on 
land. In order to make the local population finance the military operations 
and the occupation, the new bank was compelled to exchange the Reich 
Credit Institute notes into the carbovanets. 

Por the purpose of absorbing the local currencies of the areas in the west 
incorporated into Germany, a Landesbank und Girozentrale w'as created by 
the amalgamation of five existing banks. Its head office is in SaarbrOcken. 
The currency of this area consists, as mentioned above, of notes of the 
Reichsbank. 10 

The occupant has not only resorted to the creation of new central banks 
and sometimes also of auxiliary financial institutions but has also altered 
the statutes of the existing central banks, in orderto make them more de¬ 
pendent on Germany. Thus, the law of 1937 governing the Nederlandsche 

8 Sec Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report , p. 204. 

9 See below, p. 622. 

10 Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report , p. 204. 



Bank was altered in March, 1942. 11 As the bank’s foreign bills and other 

foreign claims are almost exclusively in Reichsmarks this currency now ranks 
equally with gold as cover for the Dutch florin.” 11 


The foregoing review of the central banks shows one common feature, 
namely, that they are not only called on to provide the population with 
legal tender but also mainly to finance the German war economy and the 
exports from the occupied countries to Germany. Evidence of this may be 
seen in the admission of the Reich Credit notes and clearing claims as cover 
for new issues. As to the item of clearing, it must be pointed out that 
because of the oppressive system of German trade in occupied Europe, 12 
Germany owes huge amounts of money to the occupied countries. 13 

Furthermore, the central banks of the occupied countries, as mentioned 
above, were compelled to absorb the Reichskreditkassenscheine. This 
device amounts in fact to a contribution imposed upon the country, although 
it is not called by that name. 

The specific organization of the central banks and their role in the ad¬ 
ministration of occupied Europe raises two essential problems, one in 
international law, the other in finance. 

From the point of view of the Hague Regulations, the organization and 
functioning of the central banks represent a violation of international law. 
The occupant has the right and the duty to restore public order and safety 
in the occupied country. Obviously, public order also means order in 
economic and financial relations. It means the restoration of a currency 
system which functions in the orderly way necessary for the maintenance 
of a normal economic life in the occupied area. However, the occupant 
violates international law by creating a special currency system in order to 
enrich himself beyond the limits imposed by the Hague Regulations. He is 
entitled only to requisitions and contributions for the needs of the army, 
with due respect for the resources of the occupied country; he cannot legally 
strip the country of its financial and economic resources by a specially 
created financial mechanism. 14 

“See Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report , p. 206. 

13 Lcmkin, “The Legal Framework of Totalitarian Control over Foreign Economies,” 
read before the Section of International and Comparative Law of the American Bar Associa¬ 
tion (194O. See also Lemkin, Valutaregiering och Clearing , Stockholm University lectures 
(Stockholm: P. A. Norstedt & Soner, 1941); and below, section V of the present chapter. 

11 In the post-war picture, the interconnection of the cover of the banks of issue and the 
functioning of the clearing agreement concluded by Germany, as well as the clearing arrange¬ 
ments ordered bv it, may be of importance. See below, section VIII of this chapter. 

14 The issues of local currency by specially created central banks in Belgium and Rumania 
during German occupation in the first World War gave rise to claims by the Belgian and 
Rumanian governments for indemnity because these governments, after the occupation, 
exchanged the new currencies for their own. These claims were settled as to Belgium and 
Germany by agreements between these two countries signed in Brussels on July 13, 1929, 
to the effect that Germany took oyer the obligation to pay Belgium 5,284,260,600 Belgian 
francs. As to Rumania, a convention was signed between Germany and Rumania on Novem¬ 
ber 10, 1928, to the effect that both governments declared as settled the differences which 



The fact that the gold foreign exchange reserves were removed from 
occupied Europe, in part by the governments-in-exile and in part through 
confiscation by Germany, as well as the fact that claims against Germany 
in the form of frozen clearing assets or Reichskreditkassenscheine were intro¬ 
duced as cover for the new issues of local currencies, makes it obvious that 
the new currencies have no financial foundations whatsoever. This dan¬ 
gerous situation is recognized not only by Germany’s Axis partners 16 but 
also by Germany itself. Moreover, the Germans are trying to impress 
upon the occupied countries that this danger may be met only by a German 
victory in a war which Germany is fighting “in behalf of Europe.” 16 Now 
this dependence of European currencies on German victory makes it 
obvious that after Germany is defeated the currencies of all the occupied 
countries and also of the dominated countries face a grave disaster. 

III. Exchange Control 

Exchange control was introduced in all the occupied countries. 17 An 
examination of the pattern of the German Exchange Control Law reveals 
two main aspects: (i) prohibition of the exportation of foreign currency, 
securities, and precious metals; and (2) surrender by the population of 
foreign exchange and gold to the state, which assumes a monopoly in deal¬ 
ing with foreign exchange. 18 Under these provisions the occupant intro¬ 
duced prohibition of free money circulation between Germany and the 
occupied countries, and ordered every inhabitant to turn in all foreign 
exchange, including gold as well as other precious metals. For such for- 

arose from money issued by the Banca Generala under German occupation, and agreed that 
Germany should undertake to contribute to the stabilization of the Rumanian currency. 
The two above-mentioned treaties create a precedent for the legal obligation on behalf of 
the occupant to liquidate currencies issued by it during the occupation. See Boris Nolde, 
“La monnaie en droit international public," Academie de Droit International, Recueil 
des Cours, Vol. 27 (1929). PP- 306-12. ... f , . , . . 

16 As to Hungary, see Sudost Echo , May 22, 1942: The piling up of clearing balances has 
its limits in the danger for the currency which could arise from big advances given by central 
banks.” g # . . 

16 “The European countries trading with Germany receive under the conditions of total 

European warfare somewhat fewer deliveries from Germany than they are exporting to 
Germany. Thus, a monetary indebtedness of Germany toward her neighbors is the result. 
Having a claim against a victorious Germany is no cause whatever for worry. In this way 
big amounts are frozen and will become liquid as soon as the war Germany is fighting for 
Europe has come to its victorious end. It is the same situation that exists with regard to 
our German non-saving accounts, w hich will be unblocked as soon as victory’ is achieved. 
Until then, however, the money is frozen and becomes as solid as iron.” Deutsche AUge - 
meine Zeitung, May 14, 1942. _ 

17 Later on exchange control w'as abolished as betw’een the incorporated areas and Ger¬ 
many as well as between the Netherlands and Germany. . 

18 On different forms of exchange control, see Howard S. Ellis, Exchange Control m Central 
Europe (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1941); Lemkin, La rtglcmentation des 
paiements internaltonaux (Paris: A. Pedone, 1939 ); also Eemkin, Valutareglering och Clearing, 
op. cit. As to the economic implications of exchange control on an international scale, see 
J. B. CondlifTe, The. Reconstruction of World Trade (New r York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1940), 
containing also valuable materials on the twelfth session of the Bergen Conference of I 939 t 
which was a most important conference on exchange control. 



eign exchange and precious metals the occupant paid in inflated local 
money at official rates much below the actual equivalent of these valuables, 
and thus retained for himself the difference in value. All the inhabitants 
of the occupied countries were at the same time summoned to declare and 
to cede to the authorities the claims they had against foreigners or foreign 
states, even if non-belligerent. Thus the occupant became the owner of 
large amounts of foreign exchange and formally secured control of the finan¬ 
cial claims of the inhabitants of the occupied countries against foreign coun¬ 
tries. 19 The bank deposits were frozen and payments could be effected only 
by special permission. Such freezing served two purposes: (i) to check in¬ 
flation by limiting spending; and (2) to use the unfreezing as a means of po¬ 
litical pressure. 

The status under international law of exchange control manipulations 
is the following: An occupant is entitled to prohibit the traffic of money 
between the occupied territory and countries abroad, because such traffic 
may be of assistance to the enemy, and because the flight of money abroad 
may result in a disruption of the monetary system and thus in a disruption 
of order and safety, which he is called upon to safeguard. An occupant 
may not, however, compel the inhabitants to cede to him privately owned 
valuables, because this amounts to a violation of the rules established for the 
protection of private property by the Hague Regulations. 

IV. Confiscation of Gold Reserves and Foreign Exchange 

The gold left in the vaults of the central banks of the occupied countries 
was immediately confiscated by the German occupant. Thus, the Ger¬ 
mans have seized gold and foreign exchange reserves of the Bank of Aus¬ 
tria in an amount equal to about 80 million dollars. The Germans also 
took possession of 25 million dollars in gold held in Czechoslovakia’s ac¬ 
count by the Bank of England in the Bank for International Settlements at 
Basle, Switzerland. This gold was released in 1939 on the promise of 
German authorities to transfer it to the Bank of the Protectorate of Bo¬ 
hemia and Moravia. However, Germany merely gave the bank of the 
Protectorate scrip in an equivalent amount in the form of gold deposit 
certificates, and never returned the gold itself. When a new bank of issue 
was created by the puppet state of Slovakia, that bank made a request for 
its share of Czechoslovakian gold but Germany did not accede to this 
request. Some gold was likewise seized in France, but accurate figures as 
to the amount seized in Paris are not available. The Germans also came 
into possession of some 228 million dollars'in gold, which had been deposited 
in France by the National Bank of Belgium soon after the invasion of 
Belgium. When the fall of Paris was imminent, the Belgian Government 

,B Freezing legislation passed by the United Nations, and by the United States even before 
the creation of the United Nations, frustrated the German plans of obtaining control over 
many of the foreign assets belonging to the population of occupied territories. 



ordered the French National Bank to send this gold to the United States, 
but, despite these orders, the gold was sent to Dakar. After the defeat of 
France, the German occupant demanded that this gold be brought back 
from Dakar and handed over to the Germans, which was actually done. 20 
The assignees of the Bank of Belgium then obtained an attachment on 
French assets in the United States for the amount of this gold. 21 From the 
other countries occupied by Germany the gold was exported in due time to 
the United States and to Great Britain, so that the invader could not get hold 
of it. Freezing legislation concerning the assets of the occupied countries 
enacted by fhe United States and Great Britain prevented the German 
occupant from acquiring the gold and foreign exchange belonging to the 
occupied countries and deposited within the jurisdiction of the United 
States and of Great Britain. 

The confiscation of gold and foreign exchange by the occupant raises the 
question of its validity under international law. According to the Hague 
Regulations, the occupant may only “take possession of cash, funds, and 
realizable securities which are strictly the property of the State” (Article 
53). A contrario , the property of individuals (Article 46), as well as the 
property of municipalities (Article 56), cannot be confiscated. The prob¬ 
lem of legality of the confiscations of gold from the central banks is connected 
with the legal question whether the central bank involved is a state bank 
or a privately owned corporation. As regards the four central banks from 
which the gold was seized by the Germans, that is, in Austria, Czechoslo¬ 
vakia, Belgium, and France, those of Austria, Belgium, and France are 
privately owned while of the bank of Czechoslovakia, two thirds are pri¬ 
vately owned and one third is owned by the Czechoslovak Government. 
In the case of Austria, part of the shares belonged to municipalities, the rest 
to savings banks, commercial banks, and individuals. As the property of 
municipalities may not be confiscated, the seizure of the Austrian gold and 
foreign exchange was illegal. Similarly, the seizure of the Belgian, French, 
and Czechoslovak gold was in violation of international law. 

V. Clearing as an Instrumentality of Exploitation of 
Foreign Trade and Labor 

In organizing “foreign” trade in occupied Europe, Germany made use 
of clearing,—an instrumentality of payments in international trade,—which 
it had applied many years before the war, mainly in its economic penetra- 

10 See Ernest S. Hediger, “Nazi Exploitation of Occupied Europe, ” Foreign Policy Retorts, 
June I, 1942 (New York: Foreign Policy Association, Incorporated), Vol. XVIII, No. 6, 
pp. 70 , 71. 

n See Albany dispatch of March 5, 1942, to New York Times, stating that the Court of 
Appeals had ruled that the State Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine 
the action brought by the Bank of France against the assignees of the Bank of Belgium in 
the matter of some $228,000,000 in gold now in the possession of the Federal Reserve Bank. 
New York Times , March 6, 1942, p. 29, col. 6. 



tion into southeastern Europe and Latin America. Clearing has had quite 
an evolution in German foreign trade practices, and one may distinguish 
three stages 22 thereof: (i) inducive stage; (2) oppressive stage; (3) spoliative 
stage. In the inducive stage of clearing Germany tried to penetrate into the 
markets of a foreign country by granting to that country especially favorable 
exchange rate conditions and also by establishing low prices for the articles 
exported. In the oppressive stage, Germany made a practice of freezing 
clearing assets and of unfreezing them later in consideration of further privi¬ 
leges in trade extorted thus from the country involved. In the last or 
spoliative stage, Germany uses clearing in order to import goods without 
paying at all. In this latter stage, which has now been reached, Germany 
has frozen the clearing assets of the occupied countries for the so-called 
“duration.” In the present situation, German trade is backed in the oc¬ 
cupied countries by political power, and therefore economic and financial 
considerations count only to the extent that they are useful to Germany. 23 

The occupant has integrated the occupied countries into the foreign 
trade which is conducted by Germany as the controlling power. Though 
clearings are mostly through Berlin, this trade is carried on in four direc¬ 
tions: (1) between Germany and one occupied country; (2) between two 
different occupied countries; (3) between an occupied country and an Axis 
country other than Germany; and (4) between an occupied country and a 
neutral country, as, for example, between Norway or Belgium and 
Sweden. For all these transactions, the instrumentality of clearing has been 

1. Bilateral Clearing. According to clearing procedure, no cash passes 
from one country to another for shipment of goods or for rendering services, 
but the payments for imports and exports in one country are set off against 
the payments for imports and exports in the other country participating in 
the trade transaction. The normal function of clearing presupposes the 
existence of four participants, two each in two trade transactions—viz., an 
importer and an exporter in each of the countries involved. To illustrate: 
A Dutchman exports butter to Germany. Another Dutchman imports 
coal from Germany. A German imports butter from the Netherlands and 
another German exports coal to the Netherlands. According to the normal 
procedure of clearing, the Dutch importer in effect pays the Dutch exporter 
through special accounts, and the German importer likewise pays the Ger¬ 
man exporter through special accounts. These trade accounts for such 
transactions are concentrated in special institutions called “clearing insti¬ 
tutes” (the German Clearing Institute is called Verrechnungskasse ), one in 

25 The evolution of clearing in German trade practices is described in Lemkin, “The 
Legal Framework of Totalitarian Control over Foreign Economies,” op. cit. 

23 “National Socialist foreign trade could not go its own way, but had to get its direction 
from the political side. ... It was the National Socialist foreign trade policy from the 
very beginning that the national economies of her neighbors should be coordinated with 
the needs of Greater Germany." Dcr Deutsche Volkswirt , June 12, 194 2. 



each country participating in the trade. Periodically, the balances of trade 
transactions between the two countries must be equalized, and only then can 
the clearing institutes of each country proceed to pay out to the parties the 
amounts due for their exports, which amounts are normally taken from the 
money which the importers pay into the clearing institute. Therefore, for 
the full normal functioning of clearings, the exports from one country as a 
whole must be equal in their value to the imports from the other country 
as a whole in given periods of time. 

The above is an illustration of a normally functioning clearing. In the 
course of its occupation of various countries during this war, Germany has 
made clearings one of the most efficient institutions for financial and eco¬ 
nomic exploitation of the occupied countries. This was done by Germany’s 
substitution of long-term and hopeless or so-called “frozen” credits for 
actual payments. Because Germany imports from the occupied countries 
more than it exports to them,—indeed, in great part it only imports, without 
exporting anything at all to such countries,—there is practically no possi¬ 
bility of balancing the payments within the clearing institutes. To illus¬ 
trate by another example: A Dutchman exports butter to Germany, while 
a Dutch coal importer cannot get from Germany as much coal as he was 
promised, or he cannot get coal at all. In this situation, the German im¬ 
porter of butter pays to the German Verrechnungskasse, to the credit of the 
Dutch exporter of butter, the amount due; but since practically no coal is 
available for export to the Netherlands, the Dutch importer of coal for long 
periods has no occasion to pay for its import. Such being the case, the 
Dutch exporter of butter, who normally would have been paid by the Dutch 
clearing office out of the amount paid by the Dutch importer of coal, cannot 
be paid for his butter. But the German occupant is eager to have the ex¬ 
porting of Dutch butter to Germany continued; and since the continuation 
of the export is dependent upon the continuation of payments to the ex¬ 
porter, the German occupant compels the Dutch Clearing Institute to pay 
out the sum to the Dutch exporter anyway, and a credit therefor is entered 
in the German Verrechnungskasse in Berlin. Then, in order to meet such 
financial requirements, the Berlin Clearing Institute must get money from 
the National Bank of the Netherlands. As the National Bank of the Neth¬ 
erlands— like every bank in the world—has limited resources, new issues of 
Dutch currency must be undertaken in order to meet the German demands. 
Because of this procedure, which prevails in all the occupied countries to a 
greater or less degree, there is a vast scale of exploitation of the financial 
resources of the occupied countries by misuse of the institution of clearing. 
The function of the clearing institutes under these conditions amounts 
practically to the levying of large-scale contributions. Because the local 
clearing institutes must meet large currency requirements in order to 
finance exports to Germany, the bank of issue in each occupied country 



is called upon to expand the currency, which amounts to unchecked in- 

This procedure creates for Germany advantages not only in the financial, 
but also in the political, field. In countries of forced collaboration, where 
the atmosphere of false peace is being fostered, the occupant is eager not to 
injure directly and openly the interests of the individual; what he does 
injure directly is the whole financial and economic structure of the country. 
For psychological reasons, the exporters in the occupied countries are less 
dissatisfied with such a procedure than they would be by a procedure deny¬ 
ing them payments at all. The harm done to the economy of the occupied 
country must be determined by the exporter on the basis of a clear under¬ 
standing of the financial implications of this procedure rather than by a 
feeling of immediate harm. He is paid for his exports by credits advanced 
by his national bank of issue, and when he receives the money from his own 
bank he does not realize how inflated it becomes because his own bank of 
issue has paid for his exports to Germany. Indeed, it is only when he 
understands the long-range effects of the transaction that he appreciates the 
true nature of the occupant’s methods. 

2. Multilateral Clearing. The trade of one occupied country with another 
occupied country, or even with a neutral or Axis country, is also being car¬ 
ried out through the instrumentality of clearing. In such cases, not one 
but three clearing institutes may be involved, namely, the clearing institute 
of the occupied country, the clearing institute of the neutral or Axis coun¬ 
try, and the German institute in Berlin. 24 The German Clearing Institute 
by this means acquires control over all transactions in which the occupied 
countries are involved. Some authors call it central clearing. Germany s 
advantages from the central clearing are numerous. On the financial side, 
Germany controls the exchange rates throughout almost all of Europe. By 
controlling the clearing balances of the occupied countries, Germany is able 
to freeze credits entered in favor of one party to a transaction and to use 
such credits as a temporary compensation in its own transactions with 
occupied countries, which it exploits by overdrawing imports from them. 
For example, Germany has imported large quantities from Belgium with¬ 
out exporting to that country, with the result that the exporters from 
Belgium have not been paid by Germany. But Belgium has a clearing 
agreement with the Government General of Poland. When the Govern¬ 
ment General of Poland imports goods from Belgium in exchange for goods 
which the Government General sends to Belgium, the German Clearing 

M In some cases, however, trade between an occupied country and a foreign country is 
functioning directly between these two countries. An example of such clearing is provided 
by Belgium and Russia (before the latter went to war with Germany). The clearing agree¬ 
ment between Belgium and the U.S.S.R.. which was established by the decrees of the German 
commander in Belgium published in the Verordnungsblali, 1941, No. 40, provides tor direct 
clearing relations between the clearing office in Brussels and the State Bank of the onion 
of Soviet Socialist Republics in Moscow. 



Institute transfers the credit of the Polish Clearing Institute into Ger¬ 
many’s balance with Belgium. Thus a partial adjustment is made as to 
frozen Belgian clearing balances in Germany. But the burden of this ad¬ 
justment is borne by the Government General of Poland. 

It is obvious that the controlling power of the occupant is being exer¬ 
cised in such a way that the most important and essential products of the 
occupied countries are being excluded from trade and kept at the disposal 
of the occupant. 

Consequently, on the commercial side clearing gives to Germany a domi¬ 
nant position, and Germany makes use of this advantage by offering prod¬ 
ucts of the occupied countries to neutral countries and obtaining in such a 
way reciprocal economic and political advantages. 

3. Freezing of the Savings of Foreign Labor. Clearing as established by 
Germany in occupied countries provided not only for the transfer of pay¬ 
ments for goods, but also for the transfer of payments for services, such as 
savings of foreign laborers in Germany, transportation costs, patent rights, 
and so on. The foreign workers, after having spent a part of their wages for 
subsistence in their place of work, try to send home some savings in order 
to help their families or other relatives. However, the Verrechnungskasse 
treats these payments of foreign workers the same as it does the payments of 
German importers to exporters from occupied countries, that is to say, it 
freezes them. In some instances the German authorities order the clearing 
offices of the occupied countries to advance to the families of the workers 
sums corresponding to the savings, but even this is by no means the general 
practice. Thus the occupied countries not only finance the exports to Ger¬ 
many, but also pay their own people working in Germany. 

4. Clearing Legislation and International Law. The occupant has 
adapted % the existing legislation in the occupied country to the requirements 
of clearing as instituted by Germany. Some of these adaptations may be 
cited. Because clearing has been made the exclusive channel of “foreign” 
trade and foreign payments, an order was issued by the Dutch Secretary 
General of the Ministry of Finance on March 26, 1941, prohibiting any 
other way of payment than through the Netherlands Clearing Institute. 25 
Furthermore, an earlier order of October 10, 1940, introduced the possibility 
of extending financial aid to enterprises “which find themselves financially 
embarrassed through their inability to enforce claims arising out of ship¬ 
ments abroad, as a result of the extraordinary circumstances prevailing 
or of orders freezing accounts abroad as a result of these conditions.” 26 
A similar decree as to the exclusion of other ways of payments abroad than 
through clearing w r as introduced in Denmark on June 25, 1940. 27 

The institution of clearing raises several questions under international 
law. Obviously, clearing has become a subtle device for extorting huge con- 
M Sec below, p. 490. u See below, p. 489. 27 See below, p. 378. 



tributions or forced loans in a disguised form from the populations of the oc¬ 
cupied countries. 28 For the purposes of such exploitation, the occupant— 
as in the case of Denmark, for example—grants to the occupied country a 
certain kind of sovereignty in order to be able to present the clearing ex¬ 
ploitation device before the population of that country in the form of an 
agreement. It is plain that agreements of this kind entered into under 
duress are invalid, because they do not represent the real will of the coun¬ 
try. F'or purposes of clarification of the law in the future, the Hague 
Regulations should be amended to the effect that the occupant should not 
have the right to impose additional burdens upon the occupied country, 
even through arrangements having the form of international agreements 
entered into with the occupied country. 

VI. Taxation 

The occupant may collect taxes only for the purpose of covering the ex¬ 
penses of administration of the occupied territory. Article 48 of the 
Hague Regulations provides that the legal basis and assessment for taxa¬ 
tion shall be, as far as is possible, the same as they were at the time when 
the national government ruled the country. 

According to the underlying principle of taxation observed in the occupied 
countries before their occupation, every Inhabitant had the right to equal 
treatment before the law, and the assessment of taxes could vary only ac¬ 
cording to the financial situation of the taxpayer. The occupant, however, 
has changed this principle, introducing the practice of political discrimina¬ 
tion in taxation as in other fields. Particularly is this true in incorporated 
Poland, where taxation is an instrumentality of German colonization. On 
December 9, 1940, a decree concerning tax abatement for the benefit of the 
eastern incorporated areas was promulgated, 29 and the following measures 
were introduced decreasing taxes for German settlers in Poland: (1) Ger¬ 
mans may deduct three thousand marks from income for tax purposes; 
(2) they are exempt from the war addition to the income tax; (3) they are 
exempt from the defense tax; (4) their exemption from the property tax 
may be tripled; (5) they are excused from a tax which may be levied on the 
acquisition of land; (6) they are exempt from the sales tax; (7) they are 
excused from the inheritance tax on property originating elsewhere in the 
Reich or abroad and transferred to the incorporated Polish areas for in¬ 
vestment or settlement; (8) municipal taxes are reduced for Germans; and 
(9) German business establishments in the incorporated Polish areas are 
granted a number of other tax privileges. 

28 The sums extorted by the Germans in occupied Europe through the misuse of clearing 
in trade relations with occupied countries is estimated by the British Ministry of Economic 
Warfare at the amount of $5,200,000,000. New York Times, October 29, 1943 . P- 3 . c °l- 8. 

29 See below, p. 516. 

6 4 


It is true that the occupant may in exceptional cases change the rules of 
assessment, because Article 48 of the Hague Regulations, as mentioned 
above, uses the words “as far as is possible.” However, such changes 
must be necessitated by the needs of the administration of the occupied 
country, and colonizing the occupied country by nationals of the occupant 
is not within the scope of such administration. Therefore the tax prac¬ 
tices as to exemptions for Germans are illegal. 

The rules of tax assessment were also changed in Belgium by the order 
concerning surrendering of non-ferrous metals, of October 20, 1941, 30 issued 
by the military commander. This order introduced tax credits for Bel¬ 
gians who surrender non-ferrous metals. The Belgian Treasury was com¬ 
pelled to collaborate in obtaining such metals for Germany and, as a result 
of the reduction in taxes incident to the surrender of scrap metals, it is 
actually the Belgian Treasury which pays for the scrap. 

Moreover, the tax rates were substantially raised in many countries, es¬ 
pecially in Poland. 31 

VII. Costs of Occupation 

The occupant is levying contributions of considerable sums in the oc¬ 
cupied countries in the form of so-called “costs of occupation.” Not all 
the figures are available. According to the World Economic Survey of the 
League of Nations for 1939-41, 32 the figures available are the following: 

£ sterling National currencies Reichsmark 

(at pre-war rates) (ooo t ooo's omitted) (at new rates) 

France. 827 146,000 7,300 

Belgium. 75 2,062 825 

Netherlands. 54 475 630 

Denmark. 26 582 280 

Norway. 68 1,353 8 10 

Total. 1,050 9*845 

Denmark, however, was not formally obliged to pay occupation costs, 
although it was in practice compelled to pay them, since the Danish Na¬ 
tional Bank had to make advances to the German authorities to cover all 
the expenditures of the latter in Denmark. As to the legality of the Ger¬ 
man occupation costs, it must be stated that, according to Article 49 of the 
Hague Regulations, contributions for occupation costs may be levied only 
“for the needs of the army or of the administration of the territory in ques¬ 
tion.” Actually the Germans, especially in France, have been using the 
high contributions demanded for occupation costs not only for their strictly 

30 See below, p. 327. 31 See below, chapter on “ Poland.” 

32 (Geneva, 1941), p. 156. See also Ernest S. Hediger, “Nazi Exploitation of Occupied 
Europe,” op. cit., pp. 76, 77. 



military expenditures but also for various other purposes, such as acquiring 
movable goods and capital assets, including real estate and shares in French 
enterprises.” 33 Consequently, such a misuse of the institution of levying 
contributions for occupation costs is a violation of international law. 

VIII. Liquidation Agency for Occupation Finance 

The foregoing review of the financial mechanism created by the German 
occupant for the exploitation of Europe leads to one obvious conclusion. 
The financial institutions of the occupied countries and their whole financial 
system have been completely reversed and have not only been subjected to 
German control but have also been closely bound up with, and made de¬ 
pendent upon, German financial institutions. The currencies of the occu¬ 
pied countries have their cover mainly in German assets. Clearing claims 
against the Verrechnungskcisse are a common plague of the financial structure 
of the occupied countries. Thus, a community of bitter experience in dis¬ 
aster and exploitation has created a similarity of interests in all the occupied 
countries. This interdependence and interconnection of the financial claims 
of all the occupied countries against the German occupant is stressed even 
more by the institution of multilateral or central clearing. The financial 
structure of occupied Europe has been forcibly 41 regionalized” by the oc¬ 
cupant in relation to the rest of the world. Therefore, for practical reasons 
the liquidation of the financial side of the occupation must be carried out 
through an institution of a correspondingly regional character. 

For a certain period after Germany's defeat, the financial situation of the 
countries under occupation should be treated as one whole for purposes of 
liquidation. The Verrechnungskasse , which is the greatest debtor of the 
occupied countries, may have claims against neutrals or even other Axis 
countries. The Reichsbank and the Reich Credit Institute, which have 
forced German currency upon the central banks as coverage, may have a 
certain amount of valuable assets. Such claims and assets as are available 
after German defeat should be placed at the disposal of the financial institu¬ 
tions of the occupied countries in order to cover German debts owed to these 
countries and their inhabitants. This summary and direct procedure is 
necessary in order to meet an emergency situation in the occupied countries, 
without awaiting the long-range plans for financial reconstruction to be 
undertaken on an international scale. 

Certain examples may illustrate the emergency nature of the action pro- 

83 Concerning occupation costs, see also Thomas Reveille, The Spoil of Europe (New York: 
VY. VV. Norton & Co., 1941), pp. 103-Q. 

According to recent estimates by the British Ministry of Economic Warfare, the total 
amounts levied on the occupied countries of Europe by the German Government, whether 
for occupation costs or other charges, are estimated at £3,200,000,000. For the purposes 
of these calculations the mark is taken at 13 to the pound sterling. London Times, Oc¬ 
tober 27, 1943, p. 8, col. 2. 




posed. As mentioned above, the Germans have blocked, in the form of 
frozen clearing assets, the savings of millions of imported foreign workers 
intended for their families left behind in misery and distress. In some in¬ 
stances the clearing institutes of the occupied countries were obliged to ad¬ 
vance certain amounts to the families in inflated currency without sufficient 
purchasing power. In other instances even that was not done. In these 
situations it is only just that the assets of the Verrechnungskasse , for example, 
should be made immediately available to the families of the workers, which 
need the money for subsistence. If such action is delayed while the question 
of pooling assets for purposes of reparations is subjected to a highly political 
and controversial discussion, this will mean a retarding of a very useful and 
humane action. 

Examples of this type may be multiplied. The author therefore proposes 
that a Liquidation Agency for Occupation Finance should be created. 
Such an agency, with branches in every occupied country, should in the main 
carry on the following activities: 

1. Elaboration of a common plan for liquidation of financial measures of 


2. Registration of all claims deriving from German measures of occu¬ 


3. Registration of German financial assets, especially of the clearing 

saldos ( Clearingspitzen ). 

4. Liquidation of mutual trade claims between one occupied country 

and another as carried out through the Verrechnungskasse. 

5. Distribution of German financial assets for the purpose of satisfying 

claims of the occupied countries against Germany as deriving from 

financial measures of occupation. 

6. Collection and distribution of related information among the in¬ 

terested occupied countries. 

7. Cooperation with property restitution agencies and other agencies to 

be established by the United Nations. 

Because the activities of such an agency may encroach upon the province 
of general policies towards the defeated occupant, it should include repre¬ 
sentatives not only of the occupied countries but of certain other members 
of the United Nations as well. Finally, it should be emphasized that a 
Liquidation Agency for Occupation Finance would prove useful to every 
international institution which is planned for general reconstruction of inter¬ 
national finance in that it would provide the first stepping-stone for such 



Labor has been a subject of primary concern of the German occupant, 
and German labor policy in the occupied countries reveals several definite 
objectives. Thus, labor is mobilized in order to maintain and increase 
production in industry and agriculture to serve the German war effort. 
Deportation of labor to Germany also serves the purpose of replacing 
German workers to be released for the front . 1 By deporting millions of 
able-bodied men and women from the occupied countries, Germany more¬ 
over hopes to disrupt centers of political resistance to the occupant , 2 on the 
one hand; and on the other hand, by separating families and keeping the 
men far away from their homes, a policy of depopulation is being pursued . 3 
In the introduction of a regime of forced labor for Jews under specially or¬ 
ganized unhealthy conditions, the occupant endeavors thereby to liquidate 
physically a great part of the Jewish population. That the policy with re¬ 
spect to Jewish labor is not based primarily on economic considerations is 
admitted in the statement of the occupant that it serves educational pur¬ 
poses . 4 In order to carry out the above-mentioned policies, detailed legisla¬ 
tion has been enacted by the German authorities and, under pressure of the 
occupant, also by puppet governments or headless governments., 


Control of labor is in the hands of German authorities, who have special 
officials handling labor matters. Thus, in Poland, there is a special de¬ 
partment for labor in the office of the Governor General, as well as special 
departments in the offices of the governors of districts, and labor offices in 
every city. In the Netherlands there is a special state labor office in the 
Ministry of Social Welfare. In Belgium control of labor for purposes of 

i On November 6, 1941, before the Conference of the International Labor Organization, 
President Roosevelt said: “To replace Nazi workers shipped to the front and to meet 
the gigantic needs of her total war effort, Nazi Germany has imported about two million 
foreign civilian laborers.”— White House Press Release , November 6, 1941• , 

a Considerations of military safety seemed to play an important rAle also in Germany s 
practice of deporting labor in the first World War from occupied Belgium. See statement 
by General Ludendorff: “The existence of a large mass of unemployed labour is a danger to 
public safety. With a view to averting that danger, men may be sent compulsorily to any 
place where they are needed; whether at home or abroad is immaterial. — 7 he general 
Staff and Its Problems, by General Ludendorff, Vol. I, pp. 156. I57-. Quoted [ r< ?j? ,, 

de Watteville, “The Military Administration of Occupied Territory in lime ot War, 
Transactions of the Grotius Society , Vol. VII (London, 1922), pp. I4&“47- 

* See below, chapter on “Genocide.” . . 

« See order of December 12, 1939, below, p. 544; see also below, chapter on 1 he Legal 

Status of the Jews.” 




local industries is in the hands of labor offices. However, if labor is to be 
shipped to Germany, the control is exercised by the field commander having 
jurisdiction in the given district . 5 

Control over the indiviual laborer is effected by the use of a work book 
( Arbeitsbuch ) or a work card ( Arbeitskarte ). The latter is a certificate on 
which the employment schedules of the bearer are listed and his employ¬ 
ment status set forth. Work books or cards have been introduced in most 
of the occupied areas . 6 

Freedom to make and break labor contracts has been abolished through¬ 
out all occupied countries. Employment and separation in all enterprises 
must have the previous consent of the labor office. This provision applies 
in the Government General of Poland even with respect to the employment 
of relatives . 7 Wages were originally frozen at the level of the date preced¬ 
ing the invasion of the occupied country. Later the labor offices estab¬ 
lished wages at a certain level which could not be changed. 

Dissolution of labor contracts and the changing of labor conditions, espe¬ 
cially wages and hours, without permission of the labor office are subject 
to penalties. Especially severe is the punishment for lockouts and strikes. 
Employers conniving with employees to close down enterprises, as well as 
picketers, are liable to penalties of imprisonment or hard labor, and in 
serious cases even to the death penalty . 8 


For the procurement of labor, different procedures are used. The most 
drastic, which is applied in Poland and in areas occupied during the present 
Russo-German war, consists of labor conscription. Polish inhabitants of 
the Government General bet ween the ages of eighteen and sixty years are 
subject to compulsory public labor . 9 The district governor may at his 
discretion extend the compulsory labor requirements for the Polish inhabi¬ 
tants of the Government General to juveniles between fourteen and eighteen 
years of age . 10 In countries of “forced" collaboration such as the Nether¬ 
lands, Norway, France, and Belgium, the puppet or headless governments 

‘Sec Verordnungsblatt, 1942, No. 87. 

• In the Government General of Poland and Ostland work cards are mainly used for labor 
control purposes. The workers are required to give their cards into the keeping of their 
employers while employed and to report all changes of name or address for entry on their 
cards. Employers must retain the work cards of workers in their employ, permitting 
employees to inspect their cards once a month, and must enter on the cards the name, loca¬ 
tion, and type 0! enterprise in which they are engaged, the date of employment of each em¬ 
ployee, changes in address or the type of work performed by him, and tne date of separation. 
All entries on work cards must be reported to the labor office, and the cards must be re¬ 
linquished to the labor office if the possessor is transferred, has died, or has reached eighty 
years of age. Verkundungsblalt fur das Ostland, 1940, No. 15. 

7 See order of February 22, 1^40, below, p. 547. 

■Order of the Reich Commissioner for the Netherlands, May 19, 1941, below, p. 496. 
See also order of the military commander in France, of November 6, 1941, below, p. 392. 

u See decree of October 26, 1939. below, p. 542. 

10 See decree of December 14, 1939, below, p. 545. 



are compelled by the occupant to refuse unemployment relief to persons who 
are not willing to go to Germany to work. Also, the device of refusing ration 
cards for people who do not accept work in Germany is widely practised. 
However, later on, labor conscription was also gradually introduced in these 
countries. Thus, in the Netherlands, a decree was published stating that 
all the inhabitants of the occupied Netherlands might be required by the 
district labor offices to perform labor for a specified time. 11 The place of 
service was at first limited to the Netherlands, but this restriction was 
eliminated in March, 1942. 12 The implementation of this order specified 
that all Dutch youths of both sexes between the ages of eighteen and 
twenty-five years were to perform labor services for six months. 13 In 
October, 1942, labor conscription was introduced in Belgium for men between 
eighteen and fifty years of age and for women between twenty-one and 
thirty-five. 11 Labor conscription serves mainly the purpose of exporting 
labor to Germany. 15 

Another means of procurement of labor is through the so-called Recon¬ 
struction Services, which assign their members to service on public works. 
The Reconstruction Service is headed by a Labor Commandant and is 
supposed to be a service of honor on behalf of the nation. At the beginning 
it was presumed that members of the demobilized armed forces should be 
provided first of all with work through these services. 1 ® 


1. Economic Background . As stated above, wages were generally frozen 
on the level of the date preceding the invasion. Only slight increases were 
allowed in the different countries. In this connection, it is important to 
stress that the purchasing power of money has decreased because of infla¬ 
tionary processes, and prices in some countries have increased—especially 
in the “black market”—by very large percentages. A picture of wages is 
given, for example, in the wage scale order for the forest industry in the 
Government General of Poland, dated February 7, 1941. 17 According to 
this order the following wages per hour are paid: 

11 Verordnungsblatt for the Netherlands, 1941, p. 152. 

17 Ibid., 1942, p. 155. M Ibid., 1941, p. 370, and 1942, p. 178. 

14 See Verordnungsblatt for Belgium, 1942, No. 87. 

14 “They [the Nazis) have changed the occupied countries to great slave areas for the Nazi 
rulers. Berlin is the principal slave-market of the world."—President Roosevelt, While 
House Press Release, November 6, 1941. 

According to figures given by Eugene M. Kulischer, The Displacement of Population in 
Europe (Montreal: International Labour Office, 1943), p. 160, the number of civilian workers 
from the occupied countries employed in Germany at various dates from the end of 1939 
to the beginning of 1943 amounted to approximately 4,454,000. The figures given by coun¬ 
try are as follows: Poland, 1,300,000; Denmark, 4.8,000; Netherlands, 300,000; Norway, 
2,000; Belgium, 300,000; France, 400,000; Yugoslavia, 250,000; Greece, 34,000; U.S.S.R., 
1,500,000; Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, 200,000; Slovakia, 120,000. 

14 See order concerning the Netherlands Reconstruction Service, July 30, 1940, below, 
p. 494. This service was dissolved fifteen months later ( Verordnungsblatt , 1941, p. 376). 

17 See below, p. 550. 



1. Male 

21 years or older. 0.50 zloty 

17 years or older. °- 4 ° zloty 

less than 17 years old. °- 2 ^ zloty 

2. Female 

18 years or older. °- 3 ^ zloty 

16 years or older. °* 2 ^ zloty 

less than 16 years old. °* 22 zloty 

When one considers that the Polish zloty before the war was equal to 20 
cents at the official rate and but 10 cents at an unofficial rate, it is seen that 
the workers in the highest-paid brackets receive in American money (com¬ 
puted at the unofficial rate) 5 cents per hour per man and 3.6 cents per 
hour per woman. In the lowest brackets a man receives 2.6 per hour and 
a woman 2.2. In Poland the prices of commodities are believed to have 
increased from 400 to 500 per cent and for some articles, such as butter and 
meat, approximately 1000 per cent. The cost-of-living index in Warsaw 
during the first ten months of occupation gives the following figures: 1S 

_ 1939 _ * 94 ° _ 

Commodity Group August December March May July 

General. 100 269 463 54 <> 433 

Foodstuffs. 100 278 614 743 5^1 

In 1942 the price for 6ne kilogram or about two pounds of butter was 
around 35 zlotys and for one kilogram of pork, around 32 zlotys on the 
“black market.” (The rations in these commodities are so low that they 
are practically non-existent for the local population.) According to this 
computation, a worker in the lower bracket would have to work eight and 
one-half days in order to buy one pound of butter, and to buy a pound of 
pork he would have to do six days’ work. The foregoing details give a 
picture of starvation wages for Polish labor. I he conditions in the coun¬ 
tries occupied in western Europe are better but still under the normal level. 

2. Racial Differentiation. In the countries occupied in the east, espe¬ 
cially in Poland, there is a difference in the wages paid to local labor and to 
German labor, as evidenced in the decree of November 23, I 939 » 19 concern¬ 
ing wage scales for craftsmen in public service in the Government General, 
and in the wage scale decree for German construction workers, of March 5 » 
1940. 20 According to the latter decree, such workers as come from Ger¬ 
many to work in the Government General are paid the same wages as they 
received in their places of employment at home. 

In the Ostland the Jews are not allowed to receive wages, and employers 
of Jews must pay a special fee to the German authorities. 20 * 

18 Concise Statistical Year-Book of Poland, September, 1939-June, 1941 (Glasgow: Polish 
Ministry of Information, 1941), p. 108. 

w See below, p. 543. *° Verordnungsblatt , 1940, II, p. 159. *See below, p. 3 **- 



Special regulations were issued on June 30, 1942, 21 for eastern workers 
imported to Germany, and on July 14, 1942, 22 for workers imported to Bel¬ 
gium, from the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine, from the General 
Commissariat for White Russia, and from the territories to the east of the 
above-mentioned administrative units as well as to the east of the Baltic 
States. The above-mentioned decrees contain a special schedule for wages. 
According to the schedule, the eastern worker actually receives for himself 
only a small amount of what the employer pays out. A special sum from 
his wages is deducted to pay for his subsistence, and the employer pays the 
main equivalent of the work performed—and this is especially true with 
respect to the higher wage brackets—not to the worker himself but to the 
German State in the form of a special Eastern Worker’s Tax ( Ostarbeiier - 
abgabe), Hence, under the wage scale schedule in question, which is 
attached to the above-mentioned decrees, the equivalent of the work is 
divided into three parts: (1) for subsistence; (2) allowance for the worker 
himself; and (3) the Eastern Worker’s Tax for the state. To illustrate: 
Where a German worker receives wages ranging from 4.25 to 4.40 Reichs¬ 
marks a day, the eastern worker is paid 2.60 for work of a like nature (of 
which he actually receives 1.10 Reichmarks, since 1.50 are deducted for 
subsistence), and the approximate difference between the German’s normal 
wage and the 2.60 wage of the eastern worker is paid to the German State 
by the employer (Ostarbeiier abgabe ). This sum amounts, in effect, to a 
form of taxation for using foreign labor. The German State does not 
permit its citizen (the employer) to benefit from the low wages paid to im¬ 
ported cheap labor, but takes for itself such benefits. 1 he amounts which 
the employer has to pay to the state increase in a special progression. 1 hus, 
while no such payments are required in connection with the six lowest wage 
brackets, they range upward in the higher brackets until they exceed the 
wages actually paid the eastern workers by 200 per cent and even more. 
Employers in agriculture, however, pay to the state only half of the normal 
Eastern Worker’s Tax. 


The above-mentioned labor system introduced by the occupant super¬ 
seded a considerable body of progressive labor legislation in many of the 
occupied countries. These institutions of progressive social legislation 
were abolished by the occupant. For example, by the orders of December 
16, 1939, and March 7, 1940, 23 claims for payments under the Polish social 
security law were nullified. Instead of legally established claims, these 
two decrees introduced some unemployment benefits for which no legal 
claim can be made. Legal rights were replaced by the grace of the occu¬ 
pant, in order to enable him to use security benefits for political purposes. 

*1 See below, p. 556. M Vcrordnungsblatt for Belgium, 1942, p. 966 

n See orders concerning social security in the Government General, below, pp. 546, 548. 



Labor unions were abolished in Poland at the same time that all associa¬ 
tions were suppressed. In the areas occupied in the west, labor unions 
were put under German control and were also Nazified from within. 

The Labor Regime under International Law 

The labor legislation and labor practices introduced by the occupant are 
in violation of international law. According to Article 52 of the Hague 
Regulations, services may be demanded from the inhabitants under the 
following conditions: 

(1) They must be for the needs of the army of occupation. 

(2) They must be in proportion to the resources of the country. 

(3) They must be of such a nature as not to involve the population in the 
obligation of taking part in the operations of the war against their own 

The reservation that labor may be used only for the needs of the army of 
occupation makes it unlawful to use labor from the occupied country out¬ 
side the area of occupation. Therefore the deportations of labor from 
occupied countries into Germany are unlawful. 24 

The occupant has no right to strip the country of all labor resources just 
as he has no right to strip the country of all economic resources. Millions 
of inhabitants of occupied countries, however, have been deported to Ger- 

24 In the first World War, Germans committed the same type of violations of international 
law by deporting Belgian laborers to Germany. The Belgian Government protested against 
these practices and tne Government of the United States, at that time not a belligerent, 
also expressed its great concern over these practices of the German occupant. See the com¬ 
munication of Robert Lansing, Secretary of State, to Mr. Grew, Charge d* Affaires in Berlin, 
of November 29, 1916, as printed in Department of State, Diplomatic Correspondence with 
Belligerent Governments relating to Neutral Rights and Duties , “European War, No. 4“ 
(Washington, 1918), p. 358: 

“The Government of the United States has learned with the greatest concern and regTet 
of the policy of the German Government to deport from Belgium a portion of the civilian 
population for the purpose of forcing them to labor in Germany, and is constrained to pro¬ 
test in a friendly spirit but most solemnly against this action, which is in contravention of all 
precedent and of those humane principles of international practice which have long been ac¬ 
cepted and followed by civilized nations in their treatment of noncombatants in conquered 
territory. Furthermore, the Government of the United States is convinced that the effect 
of this policy, if pursued, will in all probability be fatal to the Belgian relief work so humanely 
planned and so successfully carried out, a result which would be generally deplored and 
which, it is assumed, would seriously embarrass the German Government.” 

Writers also condemned these practices. See James W. Garner, International Law and the 
World War (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1920), Vol. If, p. 183: 

“Whatever may be the technical merits of the German case, the enormous scale on which 
the policy of deportation was carried out and the harsh and indiscriminate, not to say 
cruel, way in which it was executed, makes it comparable to the slave raids on the Gold 
Coast of Africa in the seventeenth century. It appears to be without precedent in modern 
wars. In ancient times it was the practice of the Roman conquerors to carry back to Italy 
a portion of the inhabitants and hold them in captivity, and it is said to have been the 
practice of Attila to force the conquered tribes into his army, but not since the beginning 
of the modern age—not even during the Thirty Years’ war—has any invader seized and 
virtually enslaved a large part of the civil population in order to carry on his own industries 
at home and to release his own able-bodied men for military service.” 



many without regard to the needs of labor for the economy of the occupied 
country. These practices, as has been indicated, are in violation of Article 
52 of the Hague Regulations. 

As stated above, the same Regulations stipulate that the occupant has 
no right to compel the inhabitants to render services involving the popu¬ 
lation in the obligation of taking part in the operations of the war against 
their country. Hyde observes that it is unlawful to requisition services 
“upon works directly promoting the ends of war, such as the construction 
of forts, fortifications and intrenchments.” 25 In the present war, which is 
more a war of movement on the ground and in the air than a trench war, 
employment of inhabitants of occupied countries in plane factories or 
bomb factories must be considered as work directly promoting the ends of 
war. Moreover, labor from occupied countries is also extensively used by 
the Germans in building fortifications, especially on the Atlantic coast. 
Thus the kind of work performed by laborers from occupied countries is of 
a nature prohibited by the Hague Regulations. 

Further disregard of the principles of international law with respect to the 
use of labor may be found in the conscription of children over fourteen, 
which amounts to a transgression of the laws of the occupied countries 
protecting child labor, and of the laws of humanity as well, especially if one 
takes into consideration the fact that these children have been under¬ 
nourished and physically weakened through the ruthless food policy of the 

The wage policy must also be considered as a violation of international 
law. The introduction of an especially low level of wages amounts to 
starvation practices—a violation of the laws of humanity, laws which are 
invoked in the preamble to Hague Convention IV. The occupant cannot 
present the argument that wages are kept on an especially low level in order 
to check inflation. If such were the case, there would be no differentiation 
of wages between Germans and non-Germans. The particularly low level 
of wages and this racial differentiation in wages create an undue enrichment 
for the occupant, particularly when the occupant is the employer. This 
enrichment amounts to the difference which is paid actually to the worker 
and what should be paid to him. The limits of this enrichment may be 
seen by comparison of the wages of German workers with the wages of the 
local population in the respective countries. Official evidence regarding 
exploitation of foreign labor with respect to wages is provided by the above- 
mentioned decrees and the attached schedules concerning eastern workers. 
As every worker is provided with a work card or work book in which his 
wages are enumerated, it is easy to establish, in the light of the above- 
mentioned decree, the exact amount which each foreign worker is underpaid 
M Charles C. Hyde, International Law (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1922), Vol. 

II, p. 384- 



as compared with the amount paid a German worker engaged in the same 
kind of employment. The amount of this difference in the wages of im¬ 
ported workers represents the amount of future claims which may be made 
against the occupant. In other words, the amount of the differences be¬ 
tween the daily wages paid to the German and the foreigner for performing 
identical work, multiplied by the number of days employed, represents the 
amount of each individual foreign worker’s claim, and these individual 
claims, multiplied by the number of workers imported into Germany from a 
given country, represent the aggregate amount of a future claim which should 
be made by the home country of the workers against the occupant. 

It should also be noted that the Germans have frozen the savings of the 
foreign laborers in Germany with the result that their families do not receive 
these savings at all or they receive them in the form of advances which the 
clearing institutes of the occupied countries are ordered by the Germans to 
pay out. In this case the occupied country is paying its ow r n workers doing 
work in Germany. 26 Obviously such amounts are creating a justified claim 
against Germany. 

The institution of the Eastern Worker’s Tax shows that the occupant has 
introduced involuntary servitude, because the occupant not only uses for¬ 
eign labor but trades in labor, collecting for the Reich specific amounts of 
money from employers using such labor. This involuntary servitude is 
also stressed by denial of wages to Jews and the paying of fees by their em¬ 
ployers to the German authorities. Obviously, such regulations amount to 
a violation of the laws of humanity as invoked in the preamble to the Hague 

“See above, section on Clearing, in chapter on u Finance." 



A special status for the Jews was created by the occupant in every occu¬ 
pied country. The definition of a Jew was based mainly upon the Nurem¬ 
berg Laws. 1 A Jew is any person who is, or has been, a member of the Jew¬ 
ish faith or who has more than two Jewish grandparents. Grandparents are 
to be considered as Jewish if they are, or have been, members of the Jewish 

faith. 2 

Regulations were issued pertaining to personal status, to freedom ot move¬ 
ment, to property, labor, rationing, and the right to practice professions. 
From the beginning of the occupation, the conditions imposed on the Jews 
were not as severe in the countries occupied in the west as they were in the 
countries occupied in central and eastern Europe. But later on, when Jews 
from France, Norway, Belgium, and the Netherlands were removed from 
time to time en masse to Poland, 3 they were treated there in the same way as 
Polish Jews. Shortly after the occupation in the west, the German military 
commanders issued regulations forbidding Jews who had fled from the oc¬ 
cupied territory to return to their homes. 4 

On November 23, 1939, a law was introduced in the Government General 
of Poland imposing upon all Jews and Jewesses over ten years of age an ob¬ 
ligation to wear on the right arm an armband with the Star of David at least 
ten centimeters wide.** All Jewish enterprises and stores had to have special 
signs visible to the public. 6 

According to the decree of January 26, 1940, the Jews in the Government 
General of Poland were forbidden to use railways. 7 Later, in October, 1940, 
the Jews in Poland were compelled to live in ghettos, leaving the ghetto with¬ 
out permission being punishable by death. The administration of Jewish 
affairs in the ghettos was entrusted to Jewish councils, which are responsible 
to the German authorities for the carrying out of demands made by the latter 
upon the Jewish population. 

All Jewish property in the Polish areas which were incorporated into the 
Greater Reich was ordered to be sequestrated by decree of September 17, 
1940, 8 the same decree providing that sequestrated property could be con- 

1 See Section 5 of the law of November 14, 1935, Rcichsgesetzblatt, I, p. 1333. 

J See order concerning measures against the Tews, of September 27, 1940, promulgated 
by the Chief of the Military Administration in France, below, p. 399. 

1 In Denmark the Danish authorities successfully resisted German demands as to the 
introduction of anti-Jewish legislation. However, after the Germans took over complete 
control of Denmark in August, 1943 . the German authorities rounded up the Jews and sent 
them to Poland. About a thousand Jews managed to escape to Sweden through the narrow 

water straits. _ . . ,, XT 0 

4 As to France, see ibid., Section 2. 5 Verordnungsblalt, 1939, No. 8, p. 61. 

• JIM' 7 Ibid., 1940. P- 45 - 8 See betow, p. 5 * *• 




fiscated if the public welfare, particularly Reich defense or the strengthening 
of Germanism, so required. By an order of the Chief of Military Adminis¬ 
tration in France of October 18, 1940, Jewish property had to be declared 
and, if it was of some value, especially if it was real property, it could be put 
under the administration of trustees appointed by the occupant, which prac¬ 
tically amounts to confiscation since the owner is not entitled to any allow¬ 
ances from property thus administered. 9 

In the Netherlands, the Reich Commissioner issued on August 9, 1941, a 
decree concerning the treatment of Jewish capital. According to this de¬ 
cree, Jews are prevented from disposing of their capital in the form of se¬ 
curities and bank accounts amounting to more than a thousand florins. 
Some exception was made in cases where capital did not exceed ten thousand 
florins and the yearly income did not exceed three thousand florins. 9 * 

As to real property in the Netherlands, the Reich Commissioner issued a 
decree requiring the registration of all Jewish real property and authorizing 
the transfer of administration of such properties to managers appointed by 
the occupant. 10 

A special form of forced labor was introduced for Jews, with an essentially 
severe regime and under conditions deleterious to health. According to the 
decree on Jewish labor in the Government General of Poland, of December 
12, i939i U till Jewish inhabitants from fourteen to sixty years of age are 
subject to forced labor. The decree states that forced iabor is normally for 
two years, but the German authorities may lengthen this period at their dis¬ 
cretion in a given case by invoking the reason that the “educational pur¬ 
pose ” of forced labor has not been attained in that particular case. The use 
of the word 11 educational’ 9 in the above-mentioned decree is evidence of the 
punitive character of the forced labor applied on a wholesale scale to large 
groups of the population in the occupied countries. 12 

In the areas occupied in the present Russo-German war (such as Ostland) 
the Jews are not allowed to receive wages. Employers of Jews must pay a 
special fee to the German authorities, and if Jews are employed in overtime 
work or on holidays or at night, the employer does not pay any extra fee to 
the German authorities. 12 * Jews do not receive unemployment relief. 18 

• Any enterprise is considered Jewish if the owners or lessees are: (n) Jewish; (fc) a partner- 
ship with one Jewish partner; (c) a limited partnership in which more than one third of the 
partners are Jewish, or more than one third of the shares are owned by Jewish partners, 
or in which the manager is a Jew, or more than one third of the board of trustees are Jews; 
or (d) corporations in which the president of the board of directors or managing officer is a 
Jew, or in which more than one third of the board of directors are Jews. However, the 
authorities are free to declare an enterprise Jewish even if the above-mentioned factors do 
not occur. The authorities may declare as Jewish an enterprise which, according to their 
opinion, is predominantly under Jewish control. See order of October 18, 194 °» promul- 

to sixty years of age, for the purpose of repairing damages caused by the war. Verordnungs- 
blatt , 1941, p. 85. ,la See below, p. 311. 

13 See decree of December 16, 1939, for the Government General of Poland, below', p. 546. 



, l 




The Jewish population in the occupied countries is undergoing a process of 
liquidation (i) by debilitation and starvation, because the Jewish food ra¬ 
tions are kept at an especially low level; and (2) by massacres in the ghettos. 
In order to isolate the Jews from every source of help from the local popula¬ 
tion, severe penalties have been introduced for extending such help to them. 
In that part of Yugoslavia designated as Serbia, the military commander 
issued an order dated December 22, 1941, imposing the death penalty on any 
person who shelters or hides Jews or accepts any object of value from Jews 
for safekeeping. 14 


The treatment of the Jews in the occupied countries is one of the most 
flagrant violations of international law, not only of specific articles of the 
Hague Regulations, but also of the principles of the law of nations as they 
have emerged from established usage among civilized nations, from the laws 
of humanity, and from the dictates of the public conscience—principles 
which the occupant is equally bound to respect. 16 

The massacres of the Jews and wholesale confiscations are an obvious 
violation of Article 46 of the Regulations; and the institution of forced labor 
is a violation of Article 52, because the occupant, while he may demand the 
services of local labor for limited needs of the army of occupation, has no 
right to use them for so-called “educational purposes.” Moreover the de¬ 
nial of wages to Jews amounts to involuntary servitude, which is a violation 
of the laws of humanity. 

Family honor and rights of the Jewish population as protected by Article 
46 were violated on a wholesale scale by separating families during depor¬ 
tations. . 

Starving the Jewish population by deliberately establishing low food ra¬ 
tions, and exposing them to mass death by creating unhealthy conditions in 
the ghettos and the forced labor camps, amount to disregard of human life, 
which is prohibited by Article 46 of the above-cited Regulations. 

Depriving the Jews of the right of free movement and the exercise of pro¬ 
fessions is a violation of Article 43 of the Hague Regulations. These rights 
were guaranteed by the constitutions of all occupied countries. The occu¬ 
pant is entitled only to make such changes in the laws of the occupied coun¬ 
try as may be justified by military necessity. Obviously no military neces¬ 
sity is involved when the aim of the occupant is solely to deprive people of 
their elementary human rights. Moreover, the obligation of the occupant 
to restore public order embraces also the obligation to restore economic or¬ 
der, which means the right to work and to make a living. 

The persecution of Jews in the occupied countries has given rise to many 
protests throughout the world by institutions, parliaments (House of Com- 

u See preiimble^o Hague Convention IV respecting the Laws and Customs of War on 



mons, the Congress of the United States), and governments. 16 The Jews 
being one of the main objects of German genocide policy, their particular 
situation in occupied Europe has been additionally treated in the chapter on 

,ft See chapter on “Genocide," below, p. 89, note45 



I. Genocide —A New Term and New Conception for 
Destruction of Nations 

New conceptions require new terms. By ‘‘genocide” we mean the de¬ 
struction of a nation or of an ethnic group. This new word, coined by the 
author to denote an old practice in its modern development, is made from 
the ancient Greek word genos (race, tribe) and the Latin tide (killing), thus 
corresponding in its formation to such words as tyrannicide, homocide, infan¬ 
ticide, etc. 1 Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the im¬ 
mediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings 
of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a coordinated 
plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of 
the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups them¬ 
selves. The objectives of such a plan would be disintegration of the political 
and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and 
the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal 
security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals be¬ 
longing to such groups. Genocide is directed against the national group as 
an entity, and the actions involved are directed against individuals, not in 
their individual capacity, but as members of the national group. 

The following illustration will suffice. The confiscation of property of na¬ 
tionals of an occupied area on the ground that they have left the country 
may be considered simply as a deprivation of their individual property 
rights. However, if the confiscations are ordered against individuals 
solely because they are Poles, Jews, or Czechs, then the same confiscations 
tend in effect to weaken the national entities of which those persons are 

Genocide has two phases: one, destruction of the national pattern of the 
oppressed group; the other, the imposition of the national pattern of the 
oppressor. This imposition, in turn, may be made upon the oppressed pop¬ 
ulation which is allowed to remain, or upon the territory alone, after removal 
of the population and the colonization of the area by the oppressor’s own na¬ 
tionals. Denationalization was the word used in the past to describe the de¬ 
struction of a national pattern. 111 The author believes, however, that this 

1 Another term could be used for the same idea, namely, cthnocide, consisting of the Greek 
word “ethnos”—nation—and the Latin word “cide.” 

1,1 See Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: Reports of Majority and Dissenting Reports 
of American and Japanese Members of the Commission of Responsibilities , Conference of 
Paris , IQIQ, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law, 
Pamphlet No. 32 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1919), p. 39. 



word is inadequate because: (i) it does not connote the destruction of the 
biological structure; (2) in connoting the destruction of one national pattern, 
it does not connote the imposition of the national pattern of the oppressor; 
and (3) denationalization is used by some authors to mean only deprivation 
of citizenship. 2 

Many authors, instead of using a generic term, use currently terms con¬ 
noting only some functional aspect of the main generic notion of genocide. 
Thus, the terms “Germanization,” “ Magyarization,” “ Italianization,” for 
example, are used to connote the imposition by one stronger nation (Ger¬ 
many, Hungary, Italy) of its national pattern upon a national group con¬ 
trolled by it. The author believes that these terms are also inadequate 
because they do not convey the common elements of one generic notion and 
they treat mainly the cultural, economic, and social aspects of genocide, 
leaving out the biological aspect, such as causing the physical decline and 
even destruction of the population involved. If one uses the term “Ger¬ 
manization “ of the Poles, for example, in this connotation, it means that the 
Poles, as human beings, are preserved and that only the national pattern of 
the Germans is imposed upon them. Such a term is much too restricted 
to apply to a process in which the population is attacked, in a physical 
sense, and is removed and supplanted by populations of the oppressor 

Genocide is the antithesis of the Rousseau-Portalis Doctrine, which may 
be regarded as implicit in the Hague Regulations. This doctrine holds that 
war is directed against sovereigns and armies, not against subjects and civil¬ 
ians. In its modern application in civilized society, the doctrine means that 
war is conducted against states and armed forces and not against popula¬ 
tions. It required a long period of evolution in civilized society to mark the 
way from wars of extermination, 3 which occurred in ancient times and in the 
Middle Ages, to the conception of wars as being essentially limited to activi¬ 
ties against armies and states. In the present war, however, genocide is 
widely practiced by the German occupant. Germany could not accept the 
Rousseau-Portalis Doctrine: first, because Germany is waging a total war; 
and secondly, because, according to the doctrine of National Socialism, the 
nation, not the state, is the predominant factor. 4 In this German conception 
the nation provides the biological element for the state. Consequently, in 
enforcing the New Order, the Germans prepared, waged, and continued a war 

* See Garner, op. cit ., Vol. I, p. 77. 

* As classical examples of wars of extermination in which nations and groups of the popula¬ 
tion were completely or almost completely destroyed, the following may be cited: the destruc¬ 
tion of Carthage in 146 B.C.; the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 72 A.D.; the religious 
wars of Islam and the Crusades; the massacres of the Albigenses and the Waldenses;and the 
siege of Magdeburg in the Thirty Years' War. Special wholesale massacres occurred in the 
wars waged by Genghis Khan and by Tamerlane. 

4 “Since the State in itself is for us only a form, while what is essential is its content, the 
nation, the people, it is clear that everything else must subordinate itself to its sovereign 
interests."—Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1939), p. 842. 



not merely against states and their armies 1 but against peoples. For the 
German occupying authorities war thus appears to offer the most appropri¬ 
ate occasion for carrying out their policy of genocide. Their reasoning 
seems to be the following: 

The enemy nation within the control of Germany must be destroyed, dis¬ 
integrated, or weakened in different degrees for decades to come. Thus the 
German people in the post-war period will be in a position to deal with other 
European peoples from the vantage point of biological superiority. Because 
the imposition of this policy of genocide is more destructive for a people than 
injuries suffered in actual fighting, 6 the German people will be stronger than 
the subjugated peoples after the war even if the German army is defeated. 
In this respect genocide is a new technique of occupation aimed at winning 
the peace even though the war itself is lost. 

For this purpose the occupant has elaborated a system designed to destroy 
nations according to a previously prepared plan. Even before the war Hit¬ 
ler envisaged genocide as a means of changing the biological interrelations in 
Europe in favor of Germany. 7 Hitler’s conception of genocide is based not 
upon cultural but upon biological patterns. He believes that “ Gcrmaniza- 
tion can only be carried out with the soil and never with men 8 

When Germany occupied the various European countries, Hitler con¬ 
sidered their administration so important that he ordered the Reich Com¬ 
missioners and governors to be responsible directly to him.® The plan of 
genocide had to be adapted to political considerations in different countries. 
It could not be implemented in full force in all the conquered states, and 
hence the plan varies as to subject, modalities, and degree of intensity in 
each occupied country. Some groups—such as the Jews—arc to be de¬ 
stroyed completely. 10 A distinction is made between peoples considered to 

•See Alfred Rosenberg, Der My thus ties 20. Jahrhundcrls (Munchen: Hoheneichenverlag, 
1935), pp. 1-2: “History and the mission of the future no longer mean the struggle of class 
against class, the struggle of Church dogma against dogma, but the clash between blood and 
blood, race and race, people and people.” 

6 The German genocide philosophy was conceived and put into action before the Germans 
received even a foretaste of the considerable dimensions of Allied aerial bombings of Ger¬ 
man territory. 

7 See Hitler’s statement to Rauschning, from The Voice of Destruction , by Hermann 
Rauschning (New York, 1940), p. 138, by courtesy of G. P. Putnam's Sons: 

“. . . The French complained after the war that there were twenty million Germans 
too many. We accept the criticism. We favor the planned control of population move¬ 
ments. But our friends will have to excuse us if we subtract the twenty millions elsewhere. 
After all these centuries of whining about the protection of the poor and lowly, it is about 
time we decided to protect the strong against the inferior. It will be one of the chief tasks 
of German statesmanship for all time to prevent, by every means in our power, the further 
increase of the Slav races. Natural instincts bid all living beings not merely conquer their 
enemies, but also destroy them. In former days, it was tne victor's prerogative to destroy 
entire tribes, entire peoples. By doing this gradually and without bloodshed, we demon¬ 
strate our humanity. We should remember, too, that we are merely doing unto others as 
they would have done to us.” 

5 Mein Kampf , p. 588. f See “Administration,” above, pp. 9-10. 

10 Mein Kampf, p. 931: . . the National Socialist movement has its mightiest tasks to 

fulfill: ... it must condemn to general wrath the evil enemy of humanity [Jews] as the 
true creator of all suffering. ” 



be related by blood to the German people (such as Dutchmen, Norwegians, 
Flemings, Luxemburgers), and peoples not thus related by blood (such as the 
Poles, Slovenes, Serbs). The populations of the first group are deemed 
worthy of being Germanized. With respect to the Poles particularly, Hitler 
expressed the view that it is their soil alone which can and should be profitably 
Germanized . n 

II. Techniques of Genocide in Various Fields 

The techniques of genocide, which the German occupant has developed 
in the various occupied countries, represent a concentrated and coordinated 
attack upon all elements of nationhood. Accordingly, genocide is being 
carried out in the following fields: 


In the incorporated areas, such as western Poland, Eupen, Malm6dy and 
Moresnet, Luxemburg, and Alsace-Lorraine, local institutions of self-gov¬ 
ernment were destroyed and a German pattern of administration imposed. 
Every reminder of former national character was obliterated. Even com¬ 
mercial signs and inscriptions on buildings, roads, and streets, as well as 
names of communities and of localities, were changed to a German form. 12 
Nationals of Luxemburg having foreign or non-German first names are re¬ 
quired to assume in lieu thereof the corresponding German first names; or, if 
that is impossible, they must select German first names. As to their family 
names, if they were of German origin and their names have been changed to 
a non-German form, they must be changed again to the original German. 
Persons who have not complied with these requirements within the pre¬ 
scribed period are liable to a penalty, and in addition German names may be 
imposed on them. 13 Analogous provisions as to changing of names were 
made for Lorraine. 14 

Special Commissioners for the Strengthening of Germanism are attached 
to the administration, and their task consists in coordinating all actions pro¬ 
moting Germanism in a given area. An especially active r 61 e in this respect 
is played by inhabitants of German origin who were living in the occupied 

11 Ibid., p. 590, n. . . The Polish policy in the sense of a Germanization of the East, 
demanded by so many, rooted unfortunately almost always in the same wrong conclusion. 
Here too one believed that one could bring about a Germanization of the Polish element by 
a purely linguistic integration into the German nationality. Here too the result would 
have been an unfortunate one: people of an alien race, expressing its alien thoughts in the 
German language, compromising the height and the dignity of our own nationality by its 
own inferiority/' . . . 

As to the depopulation policy in occupied Yugoslavia, see, in general, Louis Adamic, 
My Native Land (New York: Harper & Brothers, IQ43). 

15 For Luxemburg, see order of August 6, 1940, below, p. 440. 

See order concerning the change of first and family names in Luxemburg, of January 
31, 1941, below, p. 441. 

14 Verordnungsblatt , 1940, p. 60. 



countries before the occupation. After having accomplished their task as 
members of the so-called fifth column, they formed the nucleus of German¬ 
ism. A register of Germans ( Volksliste ) 15 was established and special cards 
entitled them to special privileges and favors, particularly in the fields of 
rationing, employment, supervising enterprises of local inhabitants, and 
so on. In order to disrupt the national unity of the local population, it was 
declared that non-Germans, married to Germans, may upon their application 
be put on the Volksliste. 

In order further to disrupt national unity, Nazi party organizations were 
established, such as the Nasjonal Sanding Party in Norway and the Mussert 
Party in the Netherlands, and their members from the local population were 
given political privileges. Other political parties were dissolved. 16 These 
Nazi parties in occupied countries were also given special protection by 

In line with this policy of imposing the German national pattern, particu¬ 
larly in the incorporated territories, the occupant has organized a system of 
colonization of these areas. In western Poland, especially, this has been 
done on a large scale. The Polish population have been removed from their 
homes in order to make place for German settlers who were brought in from 
the Baltic States, the central and eastern districts of Poland, Bessarabia, 
and from the Reich itself. The properties and homes of the Poles are being 
allocated to German settlers; and to induce them to reside in these areas the 
settlers receive many privileges, especially in the way of tax exemptions. 17 


The destruction of the national pattern in the social field has been accom¬ 
plished in part by the abolition of local law and local courts and the imposi¬ 
tion of German law and courts, and also by Germanization of the judicial 
language and of the bar. 18 The social structure of a nation being vital to its 
national development, the occupant also endeavors to bring about such 
changes as may weaken the national spiritual resources. The focal point of 
this attack has been the intelligentsia, because this group largely provides 
national leadership and organizes resistance against Nazification. This is 
especially true in Poland and Slovenia (Slovene part of Yugoslavia), where 
the intelligentsia and the clergy were in great part removed from the rest of 
the population and deported for forced labor in Germany. The tendency of 
the occupant is to retain in Poland only the laboring and peasant class, while 
in the western occupied countries the industrialist class is also allowed to 
remain, since it can aid in integrating the local industries with the German 
war economy. 

16 As to Poland, see order of October 29, 1941, below, p. 552. 

“ As to Norway, see order of September 25, 1940, below, p. 499. 

17 See above, chapter on “Finance." 

18 See above, chapters on "Law" and "Courts." 




In the incorporated areas the local population is forbidden to use its own 
language in schools and in printing. According to the decree of August 6, 
1940, 19 the language of instruction in all Luxemburg schools was made ex¬ 
clusively German. "The French language was not permitted to be taught in 
primary schools; only in secondary schools could courses in that language 
continue to be given. German teachers were introduced into the schools 
and they were compelled to teach according to the principles of National 

Socialism.' 20 

In Lorraine general compulsory education to assure the upbringing of 
youth in the spirit of National Socialism begins at the age of six. 21 1 1 contin¬ 
ues for eight years, or to the completion of the grammar school ( Volksschule ), 
and then for three more years, or to the completion of a vocational school. 
Moreover, in the Polish areas Polish youths were excluded from the benefit of 
liberal arts studies and were channeled predominantly into the trade schools. 
The occupant apparently believes that the study of the literal arts may de¬ 
velop independent national Polish thinking, and therefore he tends to prepare 
Polish youths for the role of skilled labor, to be employed in German industries. 

In order to prevent the expression of the national spirit through artistic 
media, a rigid control of all cultural activities has been introduced. All per¬ 
sons engaged in painting, drawing, sculpture, music, literature, and the 
theater are required to obtain a license for the continuation of their activities. 
Control in these fields is exercised through German authorities. In Luxem¬ 
burg this control is exercised through the Public Relations Section of the 
Reich Propaganda Office and embraces music, painting, theater, architec¬ 
ture, literature, press, radio, and cinema. Every one of these activities is 
controlled through a special chamber and all these chambers are controlled 
by one chamber, which is called the Reich Chamber of Culture ( ReichshttlLur - 
hammer ). 22 The local chambers of culture are presided over by the propa¬ 
ganda chief of the National Socialist Party in the given area. Not only have 
national creative activities in the cultural and artistic field been rendered 

impossible by regimentation, but the population has also been deprived of 
inspiration from the existing cultural and artistic values. Thus, especially 
in Poland, were national monuments destroyed and libraries, archives, 
museums, and galleries of art carried away. 23 In 1939 the Germans burned 

iv s ce below, p. 44^' 

w •• It is the task of the director to orient and conduct the school systematically according 
to National Socialist principles.’—See announcement for execution of the order concerning 
the elementary school system, February 14, 194 *, promulgated in Lorraine by the Chiet 
of Civil Administration, below, p. 388. 

*1 Verordnungsblatt, 1941, p. 100. See below, p. 386. 

M As to organization of the Reich Chamber of Culture, see law of November 1, I 933 » 

^'^See note of' the VoHsh Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Polish Govcrnment-in-Lxile 
to the Allied and neutral powers of May 3, 1941, in Polish White Book: Republic of I oland, 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, German Occupation of Poland—Extract of Note Addressed to 
the Allied and Neutral Powers (New York: The Greystone Press [1942I), pp. 3 &- 39 - 




the great library of the Jewish Theological Seminary at Lublin, Poland. 
This was reported by the Germans as follows: . 

For us it was a matter of special pride to destroy the Talmudic Academy which was 
known as the greatest in Poland. . . . We threw out of the building the great Tal¬ 
mudic library, and carted it to market. There we set fire to the books. The fire lasted 
for twenty hours. The Jews of Lublin were assembled around and cried bitterly. 
Their cries almost silenced us. Then we summoned the military band and the joyful 
shouts of the soldiers silenced the sound of the Jewish cries. 24 


The destruction of the foundations of the economic existence of a national 
group necessarily brings about a crippling of its development, even a retro¬ 
gression. The lowering of the standard of living creates difficulties in 
fulfilling cultural-spiritual requirements. Furthermore, a daily fight liter¬ 
ally for bread and for physical survival may handicap thinking in both 
general and national terms. 

It was the purpose of the occupant to create such conditions as these among 
the peoples of the occupied countries, especially those peoples embraced 
in the first plans of genocide elaborated by him—the Poles, the Slovenes, 
and the Jews. 

The Jews were immediately deprived of the elemental means of exist¬ 
ence. 25 As to the Poles in incorporated Poland, the purpose of the occupant 
was to shift the economic resources from the Polish national group to the 
German national group. Thus the Polish national group had to be impov¬ 
erished and the German enriched. This was achieved primarily by con¬ 
fiscation of Polish property under the authority of the Reich Commissioner 
for the Strengthening of Germanism. But the process was likewise furthered 
by the policy of regimenting trade and handicrafts, since licenses for such 
activities were issued to Germans, and only exceptionally to Poles. In this 
way, the Poles were expelled from trade, and the Germans entered that field. 

As the occupant took over the banks a special policy for handling bank 
deposits was established in order to strengthen the German element. One 
of the most widely patronized Polish banks, called the Post Office Savings 
Bank (P.K.O.), possessed, on the day of the occupation, deposits of millions 
of Polish citizens. The deposits, however, were repaid by the occupant 
only to the German depositors upon production by them of a certificate 
of their German origin. 26 Thus the German element in Poland was imme¬ 
diately made financially stronger than the Polish. In Slovenia the Ger¬ 
mans have liquidated the financial cooperatives and agricultural associations, 
which had for decades proved to be a most efficient instrumentality in raising 
the standard of living and in promoting national and social progress. 

24 Frankfurter Zcitung, Wochcn-Ausgabe, March 28, 1941. 

** See above, chapter on “Legal Status of the Jews.” 

«See ordinance promulgated by the German Trustee of the Polish Savings Bank pub¬ 
lished in Tiiorner Freihcit of December 11, 1940* 



In other countries, especially in Alsace-Lorraine and Luxemburg, genocide 
in the economic field was carried out in a different manner. As the Luxem- 
burgers are considered to be of related blood, opportunity is given them to 
recognize the Germanic elements in themselves, and to work for the 
strengthening of Germanism. If they do not take advantage of this 44 op¬ 
portunity,” their properties are taken from them and given to others who 
are eager to promote Germanism. 27 

Participation in economic life is thus made dependent upon one’s being Ger¬ 
man or being devoted to the cause of Germanism. Consequently, promoting 
a national ideology other than German is made difficult and dangerous. 


In the occupied countries of 14 people of non-related blood,” a policy of 
depopulation is pursued. Foremost among the methods employed for this 
purpose is the adoption of measures calculated to decrease the birthrate of 
the national groups of non-related blood, while at the same time steps are 
taken to encourage the birthrate of the Volksdeutsche living in these countries. 
Thus in incorporated Poland marriages between Poles are forbidden without 
the special permission of the Governor ( Reichsstatthalter) of the district; and 
the latter, as a matter of principle, does not permit marriages between Poles. 28 

The birthrate of the undesired group is being further decreased as a 
result of the separation of males from females 29 by deporting them for forced 
labor elsewhere. Moreover, the undernourishment of the parents, because of 
discrimination in rationing, brings about not only a lowering of the birthrate, 
but a lowering of the survival capacity of children born of underfed parents. 

As mentioned above, the occupant is endeavoring to encourage the birth¬ 
rate of the Germans. Different methods are adopted to that end. Special 
subsidies are provided in Poland for German families having at least three 
minor children. 80 Because the Dutch and Norwegians are considered of 

57 See “Property,” above, p. 38. 

* 8 See Report of Primate of Poznai'i to Pius XII, The Black Book of Poland (New York: 
G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1942), p. 383. 

* 9 That the separation of males from females was preconceived by Hitler as an element of 
genocide is obvious from his statement: 

llk We ore obliged to depopulate / he went on emphatically, ‘as part of our mission of pre¬ 
serving the German population. We shall have to develop a technique of depopulation. 
If you ask me what I mean by depopulation, I mean the removal of entire racial units. 
And that is what I intend to carry out—that, roughly, is my task. Nature is cruel, there¬ 
fore we, too, may be cruel, li I can send the llower of the German nation into the hell of 
war without the smallest pity for the spilling of precious German blood, then surely I have 
the right to remove millions of an inferior race that breeds like vermin! And by “remove” 
I don't necessarily mean destroy; I shall simply take systematic measures to dam their 
great natural fertility. For example, I shall keep their men and women separated for years. 
Do you remember the falling birthrate of the world war? Why should we not do quite 
consciously and through a number of years what was at that time merely the inevitable 
consequence of the long war? There arc many ways, systematical and comparatively pain¬ 
less, or at any rate bloodless, of causing undesirable races to die out.’ ”—Rauschning, op. cit., 
pp. 137-38, by courtesy of G. P. Putnam’s Sons. 

^ 10 See order concerning the granting of child subsidies to Germans in the Government 
General, of March 10, 1942, below, p. 553. 



related blood, the bearing, by Dutch and Norwegian women, of illegitimate 
children begotten by German military men is encouraged by subsidy. 31 

Other measures adopted are along the same lines. Thus the Reich Com¬ 
missioner has vested in himself the right to act as a guardian or parent to a 
minor Dutch girl if she intends to marry a German. 32 The special care for 
legitimation of children in Luxemburg, as revealed in the order concerning 
changes in family law of March 22, 1941, 33 is dictated by the desire to en¬ 
courage extramarital procreation with Germans. 


The physical debilitation and even annihilation of national groups in oc¬ 
cupied countries is carried out mainly in the following ways: 

1. Racial Discrimination in Feeding. Rationing of food is organized ac¬ 
cording to racial principles throughout the occupied countries. “The Ger¬ 
man people come before all other peoples for food,” declared Reich Minister 
Goring on October 4, 1942. 34 In accordance with this program, the German 
population is getting 93 per cent of its pre-war diet, while those in the oc¬ 
cupied territories receive much less: in Warsaw, for example, the Poles re¬ 
ceive 66 per cent of the pre-war rations and the Jews only 20 per cent. 36 The 
following shows the difference in the percentage of meat rations received by 
the Germans and the population of the occupied countries: Germans, 100 
per cent; Czechs, 86 per cent; Dutch, 71 per cent; Poles (Incorporated 
Poland), 71 per cent; Lithuanians, 57 per cent; French, 51 per cent; Belgians, 
40 per cent; Serbs, 36 per cent; Poles (General Government), 36 per cent; 
Slovenes, 29 per cent; Jews, o per cent. 36 

The percentage of pre-war food received under present rations (in calories 
per consumer unit) is the following: 37 Germans, 93 per cent; Czechs, 83 per 
cent; Poles (Incorporated Poland), 78 per cent; Dutch, 70 per cent; Belgians, 
66 per cent; Poles (General Government), 66 per cent; Norwegians, 54 per 
cent; Jews, 20 per cent. 

As to the composition of food, the percentages of required basic nutrients 
received under present rations (per consumer unit) are as follows: 38 

31 See order of July 28, 1942, concerning the subsidizing of children of members of the 
German armed forces in occupied territories, Reichsgeselzblatt, 1942, I, p. 488: 

“To maintain and promote a racially valuable German heritage, children begotten by 
members of the German armed forces in the occupied Norwegian and Dutch territories and 
born of Norwegian or Dutch women will upon the application of the mother be granted a 
special subsidy and benefit through the offices of the Reich Commissioners for the occupied 
Norwegian and Dutch territories.’' 

32 See order of February 28, 1941, below, p. 474. M See below, p. 428. 

31 See New York Times, October 5, 1902, p. 4, col. 6. 

34 The figure' quoted in this and the following two paragraphs have been taken, with the 
permission of the Institute of Jewish Affairs, from its publication entitled Starvation over 
Europe (Made in Germany ); A Documented Record , 1943 (New York, 1943), pp. 37, 47, 52. 

38 Ibid., p. 37. 37 Ibid., p. 47. 

38 Ibid., p. 52. For further details, see League of Nations, World Economic Survey (Ge¬ 
neva, 1942), pp. 90-91. 



Consumer Unit 











...... 90 




. 84 




. 79 



Poles (Incorporated Poland). 

. 76 



Poles (General Government). 

. 77 








. 58 

7 i 



. 38 




. 27 



The result of racial feeding is a decline in health of the nations involved 
and an increase in the deathrate. In Warsaw, anemia rose 113 per cent 
among Poles and 435 among Jews. 39 The deathrate per thousand in 1941 
amounted in the Netherlands to 10 per cent; in Belgium to 14.5 per cent; 
in Bohemia and Moravia to 13.4. 40 The Polish mortality in Warsaw in 1941 
amounted in July to 1,316; 41 in August to 1,729; 42 and in September to 
2,r6o. 43 

2. Endangering of Health. The undesired national groups, particularly 
in Poland, are deprived of elemental necessities for preserving health and 
life. 1 his latter method consists, for example, of requisitioning warm cloth¬ 
ing and blankets in the winter and withholding firewood and medicine. 
During the winter of 1940-41, only a single room in a house could be heated 
in the Warsaw ghetto, and children had to take turns in warming themselves 
there. No fuel at all has been received since then by the Jews in the ghetto. 44 

Moreover, the Jews in the ghetto are crowded together under conditions of 
housing inimical to health, and in being denied the use of public parks they 
are even deprived of the right to fresh air. Such measures, especially per¬ 
nicious to the health of children, have caused the development of various 
diseases. The transfer, in unheated cattle trucks and freight cars, of hun¬ 
dreds of thousands of Poles from Incorporated Poland to the Government 
General, which took place in the midst of a severe winter, resulted in a dec¬ 
imation of the expelled Poles. 

3. Mass Killings . The technique of mass killings is employed mainly 
against Poles, Russians, and Jews, as well as against leading personalities from 
among the non-collaborationist groups in all the occupied countries. In 
Poland, Bohemia-Moravia, and Slovenia, the intellectuals are being “liqui¬ 
dated” because they have always been considered as the main bearers of 

39 See Hitler*s Ten-Year War on the Jews (Institute of Jewish Affairs of the American 
Jewish Congress. YVorld Jewish Congress, New York, 1943), p. 144. 

i0 League of Nations, Monthly Bulletin of Statistics (Geneva, 1942), Nos. 4, 5, 6. 

41 Nowy Kurjer Warszawski (Warsaw), August 29, 1941. 

a Die Nation (Bern), August 13, 1942. ** Poland Fights (New York), May 16, 1942. 

44 Hitler's Ten - Year War on the Jews , p. 144. 



national ideals and at the time of occupation they were especially suspected 
of being the organizers of resistance. The Jews for the most part are liqui¬ 
dated within the ghettos, 45 or in special trains in which they are transported 
to a so-called “unknown” destination. The number of Jews who have 
been killed by organized murder in all the occupied countries, according to 
the Institute of Jewish Affairs of the American Jewish Congress in New 
York, amounts to 1,702,500. 46 


In Luxemburg, where the population is predominantly Catholic and re¬ 
ligion plays an important role in national life, especially in the field of edu¬ 
cation, the occupant has tried to disrupt these national and religious influ¬ 
ences. Children over fourteen years of age were permitted by legislation to 
renounce their religious affiliations, 47 for the occupant was eager to enroll 
such children exclusively in pro-Nazi youth organizations. Moreover, in 
order to protect such children from public criticism, another law was issued 
at the same time imposing penalties ranging up to 15,000 Reichsmarks for 
any publication of names or any general announcement as to resignations 
from religious congregations. 48 Likewise in Poland, through the systematic 
pillage and destruction of church property and persecution of the clergy, the 
German occupying authorities have sought to destroy the religious leader¬ 
ship of the Polish nation. 


In order to weaken the spiritual resistance of the national group, the occu¬ 
pant attempts to create an atmosphere of moral debasement within this 

46 See the Joint Declaration by members of the United Nations, issued simultaneously 
in Washington and in London, on December 17, 1942: 

“The attention of the Belgian, Czechoslovak, Greek, Jugoslav, Luxembourg, Nether¬ 
lands, Norwegian, Polish, Soviet, United Kingdom and United States Governments and 
also of the French National Committee has been drawn to numerous reports from Europe 
that the German authorities, not content with denying to persons of Jewish race in all the 
territories over which their barbarous rule has been extended, the most elementary human 
rights, are now carrying into effect Hitler’s oft-repeated intention to exterminate the Jewish 
people in Europe. 

“From all the occupied countries Jews are being transported in conditions of appalling 
horror and brutality to Eastern Europe. In Poland, which has been made the principal Nazi 
slaughterhouse, the ghettos established by the German invader are being systematically 
emptied of all Jews except a few highly skilled workers required for war industries. None 
of those taken away are ever heard of again. The able-bodied are slowly worked to death 
in labor camps. Yhe infirm are left to die of exposure and starvation or are deliberately 
massacred in mass executions. The number of victims of these bloody cruelties is reckoned 
in many hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent men, women aixl children. 

“The above-mentioned governments and the French National Committee condemn in 
the strongest possible terms this bestial policy of cold-blooded extermination. They declare 
that such events can only strengthen the resolve of all freedom-loving peoples to overthrow 
the barbarous Hitlerite tyranny. They reaffirm their solemn resolution to insure that those 
responsible for these crimes shall not escape retribution, and to press on with the necessary 
practical measures to this end .”—The United Nations Review , Vol. Ill (1943), No. 1, p. 1. 

44 Hitler*s Ten- Year War on the Jews, p. 307. 

47 See order of December 9, 1940, below, p. 438. 

48 Ibid. 



group. According to this plan, the mental energy of the group should be 
concentrated upon base instincts and should be diverted from moral and 
national thinking. It is important for the realization of such a plan that the 
desire for cheap individual pleasure be substituted for the desire for collective 
feelings and ideals based upon a higher morality. Therefore, the occupant 
made an effort in Poland to impose upon the Poles pornographic publications 
and movies. The ‘consumption of alcohol was encouraged, for while food 
prices have soared, the Germans have kept down the price of alcohol, and 
the peasants are compelled by the authorities to take spirits in payment for 
agricultural produce. The curfew law, enforced very strictly against Poles, 
is relaxed if they can show the authorities a ticket to one of the gambling 
houses which the Germans have allowed to come into existence. 49 

III. Recommendations for the Future 


The above-described techniques of genocide represent an elaborate, al¬ 
most scientific, system developed to an extent never before achieved by any 
nation. 60 Hence the significance of genocide and the need to review interna¬ 
tional law in the light of the German practices of the present war. These 
practices have surpassed in their unscrupulous character any procedures or 
methods imagined a few decades ago by the framers of the Hague Regula¬ 
tions. Nobody at that time could conceive that an occupant would resort to 
the destruction of nations by barbarous practices reminiscent of the darkest 
pages of history. Hence, among other items covered by the Hague Regula¬ 
tions, there are only technical rules dealing with some (but by no means all) 
of the essential rights of individuals; and these rules do not take into consid¬ 
eration the interrelationship of such rights with the whole problem of nations 
subjected to virtual imprisonment. The Hague Regulations deal also with 
the sovereignty of a state, but they are silent regarding the preservation of 
the integrity of a people. However, the evolution of international law, par¬ 
ticularly since the date of the Hague Regulations, has brought about a con¬ 
siderable interest in national groups as distinguished from states and indi¬ 
viduals. National and religious groups were put under a special protection 
by the Treaty of Versailles and by specific minority treaties, when it became 

49 Under Polish law, 1919-39, gambling houses were prohibited; nor did they exist on 
Polish soil when it was under Russian, German, and Austrian rule before 1914- See The 

Black Book of Poland , pp. 513, 514. . , .... . c *1 „ 

60 “ No conqueror has ever chosen more diabolical methods for gaining the mastery ot the 
soul and body of a people."— Manchester Guardian , February 28 1941. 

"We know that there is no war in all our history where such ruthless and deliberate steps 
have been taken for the disintegration of civilian life and the suffering and the death of 
civilian populations."—Hugh R. Jackson, Special Assistant to the Director of Foreign 
Relief and Rehabilitation Operations, U.S. Department of State, in an address before the 
National Conference of Social Work, New York, March 12, 1943; printed in Department ot 
State, Bulletin , Vol. VIII, No. 194 (March 13, 1943 ). P- 2I 9 * 



obvious that national minorities were compelled to live within the bounda¬ 
ries of states ruled by governments representing a majority of the population. 
The constitutions which were framed after 1918 also contain special provi¬ 
sions for the protection of the rights of national groups. Moreover penal 
codes which were promulgated at that time provide for the protection of such 
groups, especially of their honor and reputation. 

This trend is quite natural, when we conceive that nations are essential 
elements of the world community. The world represents only so much 
culture and intellectual vigor as are created by its component nationa 
groups. 61 Essentially the idea of a nation signifies constructive cooperation 
and original contributions, based upon genuine traditions, genuine culture, 
and a well-developed national psychology. The destruction of a nation, 
therefore, results in the loss of its future contributions to the world. More¬ 
over, such destruction offends our feelings of morality and justice m muc 1 
the same way as does the criminal killing of a human being: the crime in t ie 
one case as in the Other is murder, though on a vastly greater scale. Among 
the basic features which have marked progress in civilization are the respect 
for and appreciation of the national characteristics and qualities contributed 
to world culture by the different nations—characteristics and qualities 
which, as illustrated in the contributions made by nations weak in defense 
and poor in economic resources, are not to be measured in terms of national 

power and wealth. . , 

As far back as 1933, the author of the present work submitted to the l itth 

International Conference for the Unification of Penal Law, held in Madrid in 
October of that year in cooperation with the Fifth Comn .ttee of the League 
of Nations, a report accompanied by draft articles ro the effect that actions 
aiming at the destruction and oppression of popu -.dons (what would amount 
to the actual conception of r- aocide) sh M be penalized. The author 
formulated two new international ’aw crimes to be introduced into the penal 
legislation of the thirtv even .artLpating countries, namely, the crime of 
barbarity, conceived .s oppres :ve and destructive actions directed against 
individuals as members of r. national, religious, or racial group, and the crime 
of vandalism, conceived -s malicious destruction of works of art and culture 
because they repress t me specific creations of the genius of such groups. 
Moreover, according to this draft these new crimes were to be international¬ 
ized to the extent that the offender should be punished when apprehended, 
either in his own country, if that was the situs of the crime, or in any other 

signatory country, if apprehended there. 6 - 

w ., , .• however, be confused with the idea of nationalism. 

{.rasas». <*. « mm 

AmnlM (V*»». No- 

vember, 1933 )* 



This principle of universal repression for genocide practices advocated by 
the author at the above-mentioned conference, had it been accepted by the 
conference and embodied in the form of an international convention duly 
signed and ratified by the countries there represented in 1933, would have 
made it possible, as early as that date, to indict persons who had been found 
guilty of such criminal acts whenever they appeared on the territory of one of 
the signatory countries. Moreover, such a project, had it been adopted at 
that time by the participating countries, would prove useful now by pro¬ 
viding an effective instrument for the punishment of war criminals of the 
present world conflict. It must be emphasized again that the proposals of 
the author at the Madrid Conference embraced criminal actions which, ac¬ 
cording to the view of the author, would cover in great part the fields in 
which crimes have been committed in this war by the members of the Axis 
Powers. Furthermore, the adoption of the principle of universal repression 
as adapted to genocide by countries which belong now to the group of non¬ 
belligerents or neutrals, respectively, would likewise bind these latter coun¬ 
tries to punish the war criminals engaged in genocide or to extradite them to 
the countries in which these crimes were committed. If the punishment of 
genocide practices had formed a part of international law in such countries 
since 1933, there would be no necessity now to issue admonitions to neutral 
countries not to give refuge to war criminals. 53 

It will be advisable in the light of these observations to consider the place 
of genocide in the present and future international law. Genocide is, as we 
have noted, a composite of different acts of persecution or destruction. 
Many of those acts, when they constitute an infringement upon honor and 
rights, when they are a transgression against life, private property and re¬ 
ligion, or science and art, or even when they encroach unduly in the fields of 
taxation and personal services, are prohibited by Articles 46, 48, 52, and 56 
of the Hague Regulations. Several of them, such as those which cause 
humiliations, debilitation by undernourishment, and danger to health, are in 
violation of the laws of humanity as specified in the preamble to the Hague 
Regulations. But other acts falling within the purview of genocide, such as, 
for example, subsidizing children begotten by members of the armed forces 
of the occupant and born of women nationals of the occupied area, as well as 
various ingenious measures for weakening or destroying political, social, and 
cultural elements in national groups, are not expressly prohibited by the 
Hague Regulations. The entire problem of genocide needs to be dealt with as 
a whole; it is too important to be left for piecemeal discussion and solution in 
the future. Many hope that there will be no more wars, but we dare not 
rely on mere hopes for protection against genocidal practices by ruthless 
, conquerors. Therefore, without ceasing in our endeavors to make this the 

63 See statement of President Roosevelt, While House Press Release, July 30, 1943, De¬ 
partment of State, Bulletin, Vol. IX, No. 214 (July 31, 1943), p. 62. 



last war, we must see to it that the Hague Regulations are so amended as 
expressly to prohibit genocide in any war which may occur in the future. 
De lege ferenda , the definition of genocide in the Hague Regulations thus 
amended should consist of two essential parts: in the first should be included 
every action infringing upon the life, liberty, health, corporal integrity, 
economic existence, and the honor of the inhabitants when committed be¬ 
cause they belong to a national, religious, or racial group; and in the 
second, every policy aiming at the destruction or the aggrandizement of one 
of such groups to the prejudice or detriment of another. 

Moreover, we should not overlook the fact that genocide is a problem not 
only of war but also of peace. It is an especially important problem for 
Europe, where differentiation in nationhood is so marked that despite the 
principle of political and territorial self-determination, certain national 
groups may be obliged to live as minorities within the boundaries of other 
states. If these groups should not be adequately protected, such lack of 
protection would result in international disturbances, especially in the form 
of disorganized emigration of the persecuted, who would look for refuge else¬ 
where. 64 That being the case, all countries must be concerned about such a 
problem, not only because of humanitarian, but also because of practical, 
reasons affecting the interest of every country. The system of legal protec¬ 
tion of minorities adopted in the past, which was based mainly on international 
treaties and the constitutions of the respective countries, proved to be in¬ 
adequate because not every European country had a sufficient judicial 
machinery for the enforcement of its constitution. It may be said, in fact, 
that the European countries had a more efficient machinery for enforcing 
civil and criminal law than for enforcing constitutional law. Genocide being 
of such great importance, its repression must be based not only on inter¬ 
national and constitutional law but also on the criminal law of the various 
countries. The procedure to be adopted in the future with respect to this 
matter should be as follows: 

An international multilateral treaty should provide for the introduction, not 
only in the constitution but also in the criminal code of each country, of 
provisions protecting minority groups from oppression because of their nation¬ 
hood, religion, or race. Each criminal code should have provisions inflicting 
penalties for genocide practices. In order to prevent the invocation of the 
plea of superior orders, the liability of persons who order genocide practices, 
as well as of persons who execute such orders, should be provided expressly by 
the criminal codes of the respective countries. Because of the special im¬ 
plications of genocide in international relations, the principle of universal re- 

64 Adequate protection of minority groups does not of course mean that protective meas¬ 
ures should be so stringent as to prevent those who so desire from leaving such groups in 
order to join majority groups. In other words, minority protection should not constitute a 
barrier to the gradual process of assimilation and integration which may result from such 
voluntary transfer of individuals. 



pression should be adopted for the crime of genocide. According to this prin¬ 
ciple, the culprit should be liable to trial not only in the country in which he 
committed the crime, but also, in the event of his escape therefrom, in any 
other country in which he might have taken refuge. 55 In this respect, geno¬ 
cide offenders should be subject to the principle of universal repression in the 
same way as other offenders guilty of the so-called delicta juris gentium (such 
as, for example, white slavery and trade in children, piracy, trade in narcotics 
and in obscene publications, and counterfeiting of money). 56 Indeed, geno¬ 
cide should be added to the list of delicta juris gentium , 67 


(.enocide as described above presents one of the most complete and glaring 
illustrations of the violation of international law and the laws of humanity. 
In its several manifestations genocide also represents a violation of specific 
regulations of the Hague Convention such as those regarding the protection 
of property, life, and honor. It is therefore essential that genocide pro¬ 
cedures be not only prohibited by law but prevented in practice during 
military occupation. 

In another important field, that of the treatment of prisoners of war, in¬ 
ternational controls have been established in order to ascertain whether 
prisoners are treated in accordance with the rules of international law (see 
Articles 86 to 88 of the Convention concerning the Treatment of Prisoners 
of War, of July 27, 1929). 58 But the fate of nations in prison, of helpless 
women and children, has apparently not seemed to be so important as to call 
for supervision of the occupational authorities. Whereas concerning prison¬ 
ers of war the public is able to obtain exact information, the lack of direct- 
witness reports on the situation of groups of population under occupation 
gravely hampers measures for their assistance and rescue from what may 
be inhumane and intolerable conditions. Information and reports which 
slip out from behind the frontiers of occupied countries are very often la¬ 
beled as untrustworthy atrocity stories because they are so gruesome that 
people simply refuse to believe them. Therefore, the Regulations of the 
Hague Convention should be modified to include an international controlling 
agency vested with specific powers, such as visiting the occupied countries 
and making inquiries as to the manner in which the occupant treats nations 
in prison. In the situation as it exists at present there is no means of pro¬ 
viding for alleviation of the treatment of populations under occupation until 

iJ Of course such an offender could never be tried twice for the same act. 
c U international Law (Under the Auspices of the Faculty of Harvard Law 

bcnool), I art II. Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime," (Edwin D. Dickinson, Reporter) 
Amerwin Journal of International Law, Supp., Vol. 29 (1935), pp. 573-85. 

6 Since not all countries agree to the principle of universal repression (as for example, 
the United States of America), the future treaty on genocide might well provide a faculta¬ 
tive clause for the countries which do not adhere to this principle. 

M League of Nations, Treaty Series , Vol. 118, p. 343. 


the actual moment of liberation. It is then too late for remedies, for after 
liberation such populations can at best obtain only reparation of damages 
but never restoration of those values which have been destroyed and which 
cannot be restored, such as human life, treasures of art, and historical ar¬ 



When the Italian troops occupied Albania after a short but stubborn 
resistance during which King Zog I fled abroad, the occupant immediately 
started to organize a puppet regime to function under his own guidance 
On April 12, 1939, a National Constituent Assembly was convoked which 
decided: (1) to proclaim the abrogation of the political regime thereto oie 
in force as well as the abrogation of the constitution of December 1, 1928; 
(2) to create a government vested with full powers; (3) to express the desire 
for the creation of a union between Italy and Albania, and to offer the ro " n 
of Albania to the King of Italy and to his successors in the form of a personal 
union. 1 ® 

On April 13,1939, the Fascist Grand Council ( Gran Consiglio del Fasctsmo) 
gave its approval to this union, and on April 16, 1939, a law was published 
in Italy authorizing and proclaiming the acceptance by the King of the 
Crown of Albania and the consequent creation of a union between the two 
states. 2 

On April 17, this acceptance was formally effected when a special Alba¬ 
nian mission, consisting of members of the Provisional Albanian Government, 
officially presented the Crown of Albania to the King of Italy.. 

By the royal decree of April 18, T 939 > 3 there was established in the Italian 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs an Under Secretariat for Albanian Affairs. 

In the further development of relations between Italy and Albania, a 
convention was signed in Tirana on April 20, 1939, to the effect that citizens 
of Albania in Italy and citizens of Italy in Albania shall enjoy all civil and 
political rights which they enjoy in their respective countries. 4 

On the same day there was signed in Rome a treaty on economic matters 
as well as matters pertaining to customs and exchange, 5 and on A ay 28, 
1939 this treaty was completed by the addition of further details. By these 
two treaties a customs union was established between the two states, Italy 
being empowered to represent this union (see below). 

1 The present chapter was written and set up in print prior to the surrender of Italy, 
ine pre.ei 1 1. 1 Italian reeime established m Albania was therefore cast in 

and much oft he account of purpose t0 <lescribe the ltalian occupation and 

un^n with Albania rather than to discuss developments subsequent to the surrender, he 
hoc allowed the chapter to stand substantially as it was written. . , ~ .. 

See text of the decision of the Constituent .Assembly of April 12 , 1039 . m the CazzelU, 
xt i? xT ilhnnw April 12-Iulv IS. * 939 * numero straordinario, p. 10. 

' cL*Ua Yifficiuledci d'Italia, April 39 . 939 . No. . 02 . 
^GatzcHuufficiaU del Regno d' Albania, < 939 . No. 27: and GazseUa ujhaale del Regno 

d ^See Gazsetta ujficiaic del Regno d’Italia, . 939 . No. 178. 



By a treaty signed in Rome on June 3, 1939 , Italy assumed management 
of the foreign affairs of Albania and the representation of that country 
abroad. 6 

In addition, the union between the two states was carried out mainly 
through the creation of the office of a Vicegerent of Albania Luogotenente 
Generate , through the Albanian Fascist Party, and through the permanent 
Italian counselors with Albanian ministries. The Vicegerent was appointed 
by royal Italian decree of April 22, 1939. He represents in Albania the 
absent King and exercises in his name the rights of sovereignty. 

A fusion of the Albanian and Italian armed forces was effected by Italian 
law No. 1115 of July 13, 1939, 7 and by the decree of the Vicegerent of Albania 
of December n, 1939. 

By the decree of the Vicegerent of June 2, 1939, 8 there were established 
permanent Italian counselors with the various Albanian ministries. Such 
permanent counselors were appointed not only in the ministries and in 
particular services but also in municipalities. 9 


On June 3, 1939, King Victor Emmanuel conferred a Basic Statute 10 upon 
the Albanian people, to replace the constitution of 1928 theretofore in force. 
Under this statute the Albanian State is ruled by a constitutional monarchic 
government. The throne is hereditary, according to the Salic law, in the 
dynasty of Victor Emmanuel III, King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor of 
Ethiopia. The executive power belongs to the King and is exercised by 
him through a Council of Ministers, who are appointed and dismissed by 
him. The King may appoint a Vicegerent, who exercises the royal powers, 
with the exception of those which the King expressly reserves to himself. 
The r 61 e of the former Parliament is assumed by the Fascist Upper Corpora¬ 
tive Council, which is composed of the Central Council of the Albanian 
Fascist Party and of members of the Central Council of Corporative Econ¬ 
omy. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council is convoked by the King, 
and the King, together with the Fascist Upper Corporative Council, exer¬ 
cises legislative power. When reasons of urgent and absolute necessity re¬ 
quire it, the King may issue decrees having the force of laws. In this 
case, however, the royal decree must be presented to the Fascist Upper Cor¬ 
porative Council for conversion into law. Articles 45 to 5 2 deal with the 

• Gazzelta ufficiale del Regno d’Albania, 1939, No. 38. In Italy this treaty was published 
by law of May 16, 1940, No. 636. 

7 See below, p. 272. 

* Gazzetta ufficiale del Regno d’Albania, 1939, No. 39. . . . 

By the decree of the Vicegerent of September 18, 1939 * No. 94 i the functions ol these 

counselors were defined. These functions are of a double character, to advise the ministry 
aud to control its activities. 

9 Decree of Vicegerent of September 12, 1939 * Fletorja Zyrtare, No. 86. 

10 See below, p. 267. 



rights and duties of citizens. Formally, civil rights were granted the Alba¬ 
nians by this statute, but every article of the statute in this respect ,s qualified 
by such reservations as “except in cases otherwise provided for by law. 
These reservations make illusory the guaranties of individual rights men- 
tioned in the Basic Statute. 


i. Italian Administration. The supreme authority (under the King) is 
the Vicegerent, who represents the King in Albania. The \ icegerent pro¬ 
mulgates decrees, called Vicegerent’s decrees {Deereh Luogotenenziah). 

Control over the Albanian Government is carried out by the exercise ot 
the appointive power on the part of Italy, but the Albanian Government is 
also controlled from within by the permanent Italian counselors mentione 

above, who are active in every ministry. 11 

A decree of September 18, 1939, defined the functions of these Italian 
counselors as follows: they advise the ministry on the one hand and control 
it on the other. Formally, the counselors are appointed by the Albanian 
Government, but the government must be authorized to do so by the Italian 
Vicegerent. The permanent counselors have a civil service rating in the 
Albanian administration and are paid from the Treasury of the Albanian 

State. . 

Beside this form of control of the Albanian administration through per¬ 
manent Italian counselors, the Italian Government exercises an effective 
influence on Albanian administration by establishing directly Italian author¬ 
ities in Albania. These authorities are controlled by the Under Secretary 
for Albanian Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Rome. In this 
way various Italian offices have been created in Albania, such as offices of 
civil engineering, offices for highway, tramway and automobile transporta¬ 
tion, for railroads and for public works, as well as an office of Director of the 
Italian Day Dispensary of Tirana, and of an Expert for Albanian \ outh and 
for After-Work Recreation Centers (Dopolavoro) . n The salaries of such 

officials are paid by the Italian Treasury. 

2 Albanian Administration. The Albanian Government is directed by a 
Council of Ministers, consisting of a president, the Minister Secretary of the 
National Fascist Party, Minister of Justice, Minister of the Interior, Minis¬ 
ter of Public Works, Minister of Finance, Minister of Public Instruction, and 
Minister of National Economy. To these ministries a Ministry for Re¬ 
deemed Territories was added when Albania annexed certain territories 
after the dismemberment of Yugoslavia by the Axis “ Every minister is 

n See decree of the Vicegerent of June 2, 1939 . Gazzelta ufficiaU del Regno i'Albania, June 

It after Germany took over Albania is un- 

known to the author. 



assisted by one or more under secretaries of state. The ministers and the 
under secretaries are nominated by the Vicegerent. 

The provincial administration was not essentially changed. The country 
is divided into prefectures, and because of the war new authorities were 
created, such as, a Central Committee for Provisioning and Consumption 
(Comilato Centrale Approvigiamenti e Consumi ), which takes care of the 
food situation in the country, and Provincial Economic Councils ( Consigli 
Provincialli dell 1 Kconomia) , which coordinate economic activities in the prov¬ 
inces with the respective ministries in the capital. 

Among other new r authorities the following are noteworthy: the authori¬ 
ties and committees for the confiscation of property and the committees for 
police internment (see below). 

In the field of finance the same unit of currency, namely, the Albanian 
franc, remained in force. The Albanian franc, divided into 5 lek, is equiva¬ 
lent to 6.25 lire. 


Fascination of Albania was carried out mainly through the Albanian Fas¬ 
cist Party, the Fascist Upper Corporative Council, and the Central Council 
of Corporative Economy. 

Albanian Fascist Party . The Albanian Fascist Party, the only political 
party in Albania, was organized in the first month after the occupation of 
Albania by Italy. It was constituted in no sense as a separate organization 
but as a branch of the Italian Fascist Party. The unity of the two parties 
was indicated by the subordination of the Albanian branch to the Duce of 
hascism. 11 I he members of the Albanian Fascist Party took an oath to 
obey the orders of the Duce of Fascism. 15 

The organization of the Albanian Party provided that its secretary be 
appointed and dismissed by the Vicegerent on the recommendation of the 
President of the Council of Ministers, after consultation with the Secretary 
of the National Fascist Party in Rome. The Secretary of the Albanian 
hascist Party was to have the title and function of Minister of State, and 
to receive orders of the Duce from the secretary of the party in Rome. The 
latter party was represented in the Albanian Fascist Party “by a National 
Fascist Party Inspector assisted by a Federal Secretary and by Federal 
inspectors of the National Fascist Party. 1 ’ In harmony with the Italian 
hascist pattern, members of the party were called upon to fulfill administra¬ 
tive duties in the Albanian Government, a£ well as to participate in the cor¬ 
porative councils. Thus, the Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party 
designated, with the approval of the Vicegerent, representatives of the 

u Vicegerent’s decree of Tune 2, 1939, Article I: “The Albanian Fascist Party is a vol¬ 
untary civ, " an militia under the orders of Benito Mussolini, the Creator and Duce of 
Fascism.” See below, p. 275. 

18 See text of the oath, ibid. 



Albanian Fascist Party to serve in the Central Committee of Corporative 
Economy and in the councils, as well as in the central and local offices of 
each ministry. 16 The dependence of the Albanian branch on the Italian 
Party is to be seen in the provision of the statute that no modification may 
be made therein 14 without previous agreement with the National Fascist 

Party.” 17 . 

Fascist Upper Corporative Council In accordance with the provisions of 
the Basic Statute of the Kingdom, the Fascist Upper ( orpoialive Council 
was established in place of the former Parliament, as indicated above.. The 
main function of this council is collaboration with the government in the 
elaboration of laws. The ministers are ex officio a part of the council. 
Among other things, the council establishes the corporative order, the budg¬ 
et, and accounts. It discusses and votes on various subjects, including 
such important matters as international treaties involving changes in state 
territory and problems concerning the administration of justice. The 
Fascist Upper Corporative Council functions through a plenary assembly, a 
General Budget Committee, and legislative committees. 18 

Central Council of Corporative Economy. By the Vicegerent’s decree of 
March 14, 1940, a Central Council of Corporative Economy in Albania was 
instituted. This council is called on to give its opinion on all matters relat¬ 
ing to economics and labor. It is composed of a president, four vice- 
presidents, and twenty-four members of the Fascist Party. It includes four 
sections—agriculture, industry, commerce, and professions and arts. 10 


In order to carry on Italian propaganda in the field of culture in Albania, 
a special institution called “Skanderbeg Foundation” was established with 
headquarters in Tirana. The Foundation is composed of two autonomous 
sections. The first section is called the Institute for Albanian Studies and 
has as its object the development of “ philosophical, literary, artistic, and his¬ 
toric culture in Albania.” The second section is called the Italo-Albanian 
Skanderbeg Club and has as its purpose the establishment, improvement, 
and furtherance of social relations between Albanians and Italians. The 
Foundation is based upon an endowment of eight million Italian lire granted 
by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Italy. The members 
of the Institute of Albanian Studies are appointed by the Vicegerent, on 
recommendation of the Minister for Public Instruction, from among Alba¬ 
nians, Italians, and even foreign scholars who have taken an interest in the 

10 See Article XXI of the statute of the Albanian Fascist Party, below, p 276. 

17 since the writing of the present chapter the Italian Fascist Party in Rome has been 
dissolved bv the government of Badoglio. This event should bring about a dissolution also 
nf riu» Albanian Fascist Party. At the close of this book, however, it is unknown to the 
author what rc^rcussions the dissolution of the Fascist Party in Rome has had in Albania. 
18 See Vicegerent’s decree No. 101, April 3 , * 94 ^* below, p. 277* 

19 See Vicegerent’s decree No. 73 . 



cultural studies of Albania. Membership in the Skanderbeg Club is re¬ 
stricted to Italian and Albanian citizens. 20 


Customs Union. By the treaty of April 20, 1939, as we have seen, a 
customs union between Italy and Albania was established. By the terms 
of this treaty the territory of both countries is considered, with respect to 
the application of tariffs and customs regulations, as one territory. All trade 
restrictions between the two countries, with the exception of those which 
may be dictated by sanitary considerations, are abolished. The Italian 
customs laws apply in both countries, and the customs administration is 
Italian. Treaties with third parties are concluded by Italy alone, though 
the effects of such treaties are also binding on Albania. However, Albanian 
representatives are to be admitted to treaty negotiations in order to take 
care of specific Albanian interests. According to the customs union treaty, 
Albania was to receive yearly fifteen million Albanian francs from Italy as 
compensation for the customs duties which Albania expected to lose because 
of the tariff union with Italy. A mixed Italo-Albanian committee was es¬ 
tablished in order to carry out this treaty. 21 

Although the term “tariff union” was used in the above-mentioned docu¬ 
ment, the conditions of the treaty justify rather the use of the term “absorp¬ 
tion of Albanian tariff interests by Italy,” because the Italian tariff system 
has superseded the Albanian system and because Italy is empowered to 
determine the tariff policy of both countries. 

Italian Economic Penetration . Because of the control by the Vicegerent 
and the Italian counselors in the various ministries over the political and 
economic life of Albania, Italian capital is enabled to assume a dominant 
position in Albania. Such dominance has been conferred mainly by grant¬ 
ing charters for monopolistic exploitation of natural resources, and for 
industrial and commercial businesses. In some instances mixed Italo- 
Albanian companies were created, for example, La Society Anonima Com- 
pagnia Commerciale Italo Albanese (S.A.C.I.A.); in other instances Italian 
companies took over directly economic interests in Albania. On March 14, 
1940, the Albanian Government signed a mining covenant with the Italian 
Coal Company (A.Ca. I.) to the effect that this company shall receive for a 
period of ten years the exclusive right of search for and production of min¬ 
eral combustibles in Albanian territory. The Italian company was given 
the right not only to extend its activities to areas free from mining conces¬ 
sions at the date of the signature of the agreement, but also to areas which 
subsequently might be freed, by relinquishment or by default on the part of 

20 See Statute of the Skanderbeg Foundation, Vicegerent’s decree No. 114 of April 8 , 1040 
below, p. 278. 

21 Rivista di dirilto internazionale, Vol. XIX (1940), pp. 271-83. 



the present holders of permits or concessions.*” The predominant position 
of the Italian Government in Albania gives to this company in fact very 
great opportunities for taking over the rights of actual concessionaires in the 
field of mining. Many other Italian or Italian-controlled mixed companies 
were given similar rights in exploiting other national resources of Albania. 


A considerable part of the Italian Criminal Code of I 93 °» namely, the 
chapter on crimes against the personality of the state , was introduced into 
Albania by a decree of the Vicegerent of January 6, i 94 °-“ 3 The Italian 
Criminal Code deals in a detailed manner with all forms of offenses against 
the state from the point of view of both internal and international relations. 
The Albanians were called upon to be faithful to both states, Albania and 
Italy, to the same extent as Italians were obliged to be faithful to Italy." 4 
Treason in the sense of this decree is punished as a rule by the death penalty. 26 

Police Internment. Judicial guaranties as to personal freedom do not exist 
in the regime introduced by Italy. A person may be deprived of his freedom 
by way of police internment—equivalent to confinement in a certain type of 
concentration camp. Decisions in regard thereto are made by special com¬ 
mittees for police internment. These include a central committee for police 
internment in Tirana and various provincial committees, of which represent¬ 
atives of the police and of the Fascist militia are members. 26 

In a country like Albania the safety of the roads and telecommunications 
services represents an important problem. It is along the roads that the 
Albanian patriots strike most frequently in their struggle against the Italian 
invader and the Albanians who are collaborating with Italians. Besides the 
provisions set forth in penal law, special additional administrative sanctions 
for such acts were introduced by the decree of November 13, 1942. 27 This 
order does not specify the offenses but speaks in general terms of acts which 
constitute 41 a menace to public safety on the roads and to telecommunications 
services." According to this decree, all inhabitants of villages included 
within a radius of five kilometers from the spot where any of the acts have 
been committed are collectively responsible for such acts. A collective 
fine of from 1,000 to 20,000 Albanian francs is to be imposed on such inhabi¬ 
tants, and heads of all families residing in the area are to be interned for one 
year. * If the fine is not paid, the land produce, sheep, and other cattle of the 
inhabitants will be sold in order to cover the sum of the fine. The collective 
fine and the internment are decided upon by the committees for police in¬ 

ternment mentioned above. 

» ft1s^n^Sw" t 't0 < t < he < wnWr O whether < an anwndment to^hJ kalian”Penal Code was en¬ 
acted obligating Italians to be faithful to the Albanian State. 

46 Decree of January 6, I 94 °> below, P- 281. „ , 82 

» Decree of October 23, 1942, below, p. 282. ** below, p. 2»2. 




Likewise there are no judicial guaranties as to protection of property. 
According to the decree of the Vicegerent of September 12, 1939, a special 
office (Ufficio Beni Confiscati e Sequestrati) was established for handling se¬ 
questrated and confiscated goods of persons who are suspected of activities 
“against the interests of the nation." This office is supervised by a Central 
Committee created within the Ministry of Finance. It consists of a coun¬ 
selor of the Ministry of Finance, of the permanent Italian counselors at the 
ministries of Justice, Finance, and National Economy, of the Commander of 
the Finance Guard, and of a representative of the Albanian Fascist Party. 
The Central Committee renders decisions regarding sequestration and con¬ 
fiscation, and the Ufficio Beni Confiscati e Sequestrati carries out the respective 
decisions. For confiscations throughout all the country provincial com¬ 
mittees were created at every prefecture. These provincial committees 
make recommendations concerning confiscations to the Central Committee 
in Tirana. 28 


In official documents as well as by writers of Italian periodical literature 
the term “Union" is used to define the relationship between Italy and Al¬ 
bania. Whatever the modalities of a union may be, they essentially presup¬ 
pose equality and coordination between the states, whereas in the relations 
between Italy and Albania there is rather inequality and subordination of 
Albania to Italy. This subordination is obvious from the fact that Italy 
assumed the representation of Albania in international relations; that the 
Albanian Government has been controlled from without and from within by 
the Italian Government; and that Albanian political life, even in the form of 
the Albanian Fascist Party, has been directed from Italy, that is, by the 
Secretary of the Italian Fascist Party, to which the Albanian Fascist Party 
was wholly subject. 

Other Italian authors recognize this fact of complete subordination of 
Albania to Italy. 29 But still other writers advance the argument that no 
state of war existed between Italy and Albania and that Italy’s occupation of 
Albania is in the nature of a pacific occupation. 30 The latter authors ignore 
not only the fact of the stubborn resistance of the outnumbered Albanian 

28 Fletorja Zyrtare, 1939, No. 99. 

39 See Giorgio Cansaccni, “L’Unione del!’Albania con Italia,” Rivisla di diritto inter- 
nazionnU, Vol. XIX (1940), pp. 113-32. 

88 Rizzo, ‘‘L'Unione dell’Albania con 1 ’Italia e lo Statuto del Regno di Albania,” Rivisla. di 
diritto puhblico , 1939, P* 18; Varanini, ”L’Albania,” Gerarchia (1939), pp. 299 ff.; Cataluc- 
cio, ‘‘L’Unione personale fra Italia e Albania,” Civilld Fascista (1939), PP* 285 ff.; Ferod, 
“L'Unione all’Italia del Regno d’Albania,” 11 Tribunale, November 30, 1939; La Torre, 

“ L’Unione deH'Italia con l'Albania i suoi riflessi politici c giuridici,” Echie Commenli (1939), 
pp. 388 IT.; Marchitto, “L’Albania ncll’ aggregato imperiale Italiano,” Lo Stato (1939), 
PP* 555 ff- 



Army in April, 1939, but also the circumstance that Albanian patriots con¬ 
tinued to fight a form of guerrilla warfare against the Italians. One must 
rather conclude that a protectorate was established over Albania by Italy 
in the course of a prolonged belligerent occupation, and that in fact the Italo- 
Albanian relationship cannot be properly described as either “pacific occu¬ 
pation M or “union.” 

In the war against Greece and Yugoslavia, Italy used Albania as an oper¬ 
ational base against these two countries. For the services rendered by 
Quisling Albanians to the Axis Powers, Albania was allowed to annex parts 
of Yugoslavia and Greece. 81 The Allies have, however, recognized that 
Albania has been overrun by Italy by way of military action, and the con¬ 
tinued resistance of the Albanian patriots has moved the Allies to issue 
statements on the restoration of Albania’s independence after the defeat 
of the Axis. 82 

31 See below, chapters on “Greece" and “Yugoslavia." 

32 See statement of Cordell Hull of December io, 1942, Department of State, Bulletin, 
Vol. VII, No. 181 (December 12, 1942), p. 998; and statement by Winston Churchill of 
November 4, 1943, London Times , November 5, 1943, p. 8, col. 2. 



I. Pre-Invasion Period 

One of the main points in Hitler’s Mein Kampj concerned the absorption 
of Austria. 1 Before achieving that goal, however, many other important 
steps had to be taken, including the remilitarization of the Rhineland and 
the rebuilding of German economy in accordance with war plans (rearma¬ 
ment). In order to be able to carry out this program unhampered, it was 
necessary for Hitler to assure his neighbors of his peaceful intentions. A 
non-aggression treaty with Poland was signed in 1934; and in his speech of 
May 21, 1935, Hitler asserted: "Germany neither intends nor wishes to 
interfere in the internal affairs of Austria, to annex Austria or to conclude an 
Anschluss.” At the time of the occupation of the Rhineland he announced 
that the German struggle for equality was concluded and that "we have no 
territorial demands to make in Europe."* On July 1 x, 1936, Germany 
signed a treaty with Austria, Articles 1 and 2 of which state that Germany 
"recognizes the full sovereignty of the Federal State of Austria”; and that 
both governments shall regard the internal political conditions existing in 
the country of the other signatory, including the problem of Austrian Na¬ 
tional Socialism, as an internal problem which concerns only the country 
involved and upon which the other signatory shall not take any direct or 
indirect action. According to Article 3 of the same agreement, the Federal 
Government of Austria declared itself to be ready to maintain its general 
policy, and especially its policy in relation to the German Reich, upon the 
basis of principles in harmony with the fact that Austria recognized herself 
to be a German state. 8 

In July, 1937, Hitler gave a specific pledge not to attack Austria, and on 
January 3 °> r 937 > declared that "the period of so-called surprises is now 
over. 4 On February 8, 1938. Chancellor Schuschnigg was invited to an 
interview with Hitler at Bcrchtesgaden. The interview took place on 
February 12, 1938, at which time Hitler required from Schuschnigg a pledge 
that he would remove restrictions on the Nazi Party and admit Nazi sym¬ 
pathizers to ministerial posts. If that promise should not be complied with, 
Hitler threatened to invade Austria; if it should be complied with, he prom- 

' "German-Austria must return to the great German motherland. . . . Common blood 
belongs in a common Reich.” — Mein Kampf , p. i. 

2 Edgar Mclnnis, The Oxford Periodical History of the War (Toronto: Oxford University 
Press, Canadian Branch, March 12, 1940), p. 20. 

* Volkerbwul (Geneva), VII, No. 11-12 (March, 1938), p. 150. 

4 Edgar Mclnnis, op. cit., p. 20. 




ised to reaffirm Austrian independence. In compliance with the request of 
Hitler, Schuschnigg formed a new cabinet, in which he gave the post of 
Minister of Interior and of Security to the Nazi leader Seyss-Inquart. 6 
Another Nazi sympathizer, Dr. Skubl, was appointed Inspector General of 
all police and gendarmerie forces. 6 On February 20, Hitler made a pledge 
in the Reichstag, in which he declared himself protector of all Germans— 
without, however, mentioning Austria. Schuschnigg, who had evidence 
of a Nazi plot then in course of preparation, tried to extend the political 
basis of his cabinet by opening negotiations with the leaders of the working 
class; and he announced a referendum on the question of Austrian independ¬ 
ence for March 13, 1938. Nazi demonstrations thereupon broke out in 
Austria and the German press started a campaign against “Austrian atroci¬ 
ties. 1 ’ 7 Hitler sent an ultimatum on March 11 demanding that the plebiscite 
be called off. The same day a second ultimatum demanded that Schuschnigg 
resign within three hours; if he should refuse, the country would be invaded. 
Schuschnigg resigned in order to avoid bloodshed. Then a Nazi member 
of the Schuschnigg cabinet formed a government and invited Hitler to send 
troops into Austria to preserve order. 

II. The Anschluss 

The invasion began on the morning of March 12, 1938; on March 13 Presi¬ 
dent Miklas was forced out of office, 8 and by proclamation Hitler assumed 
office as Chief of State of Austria and took command of its armed forces. 9 
A law of March 13, 1938 (published in the Reichsgesetzblatt the following day) 
provided for the annexation of Austria by Germany; 10 and from then on 
Austria became a province of the German Reich. (The name Ostmark was 
also temporarily used for the designation of Austria.) The same law like¬ 
wise announced a plebiscite for April 10, 1938, “on the question of reunion 
with the German Reich.” The act of annexation, however, had in effect 
converted the issue from a question to be decided By plebiscite into an 
affirmative fact. 

4 Seyss-Inquart now serves as Reich Commissioner of the Netherlands. 

4 Bulletin of International News (The Royal Institute of International Affairs), Vol. XV, 
No. 5 (March 5, I 93 &)» P* *88* 

7 In order to create an atmosphere of appeasement in the United States, Walt her Funk, 
the German Minister of Economics, on March 6 appealed to the United States for an im¬ 
provement in American-German trade relations, lie proposed an international plan as a 

basis of stabilizing currencies. rT , . ... .1 . ~ . 

8 See 44 The Occupation of Austria, in The Untied States m World Affairs , an Account of 
American Foreign Relatiojis , IQ38, by Whitney H. Shepardson in collaboration with William 
O Scroggs published by the Council on Foreign Relations (New York, 1939), especially 

P ’t*On the same date Gdring warned Europe that the Reich extended protection to all 

Germans, whether or not they lived within German borders. . . , 

10 See below p. 283. This law embodied verbatim the Austrian Federal Constitutional 
Law of the same date concerning the reunion of Austria with Germany and providing for a 
plebiscite on April 10. 

I 10 


.^ ha 1 t the P Ieb )scite, indeed, was conceived only as a formality to serve 
Iitler s purpose is clear from the fact that the incorporation occurred before 
the plebiscite and that no flexible or alternative clause was provided in the 
incorporating act in the event that the decision by plebiscite should be 
against the incorporation. On the same day, March 13, Hitler published a 
decree by which the Austrian Federal Army was incorporated into the Ger¬ 
man VVehrmacht and placed under Hitler’s command. 11 All members of the 
ormer Austrian Federal Army were compelled without delay to take the 
oath of allegiance to him as their Commander in Chief. Thus, in anticipa¬ 
tion of a "free’’ plebiscite, Austria was already absorbed and disarmed. 

On March 15 a decree of the Fiihrer was published by which the Austrian 
hederal Government was abolished and its name changed to Austrian Pro¬ 
vincial Government. A governor was named for-Austria to serve as head 
of the Provincial Government. 13 

On the same date Hitler issued a decree to the effect that all laws and 
decrees promulgated for the German Reich after March 13, 1938, should 
extend automatically to Austria, except in those cases in which an express 
reservation was made to the contrary. 13 Thus the sovereignty of German 
law was imposed upon Austria. Moreover, by the same decree a number of 
specific German laws were introduced, such as the Reich flag law of Septem¬ 
ber 15, 1935; the law against the formation of new parties, which law pro¬ 
vided that the only political party in Austria should be the National Socialist 
1 arty; the law for ensuring the unity of party and state; the Reichsstaltlialter 
Act of January 30, 1935, which defines the duties and rights of the Reich 
governors; the order for implementation of the Four-Year Plan of October 
18, 1936; and the law concerning compulsory registration of members of the 
German State abroad. 

The Reich Minister of the Interior, on March 16, 1938, was entrusted by 
Hit'er,with the carrying out of "the reunion of Austria with the German 

Reich, and was authorized to delegate his authority to a special Reich 
Commissioner for Afistria. 14 

By decree of March 17, 1938,“ the Austrian National Bank was liquidated 
and its administration and assets transferred to the Reichsbank for the 
account of the Reich. Also on March 17, the Reichsmark was introduced as 
legal tender in addition to the Austrian schilling. The ratio of exchange 
between these two currencies was established as 1 Reichsmark to 1 5 schill¬ 
ings. The reserves of the Austrian National Bank, amounting to 422,000,- 
000 schillings worth of gold and foreign exchange, were transferred to the 
Reichsbank. 1 * On March 23, Hitler took command of the Austrian flotilla 
and ordered the building of a new war fleet on the Danube. 17 

“ See bfe. 284. “ 566 be ' 0W ' P ' 1 % be!ow “ % P- * 9 *. 

Prc"« 1r ?oi d . 1 f Ur "?' ° f /nt . ernat <°™‘ Affairs. /(^/(London: Oxford University 

VoM D 77 Uni £r 1 ,C W** of A ,,c Ro >: i i l Institute of International Affairs)^ 

voi. 1, p. 77. n Current History, May, 1938, p. 61. 



A further evidence of the extension of German sovereignty before the 
plebiscite is the decree of March 22, 1938, providing that the Austrian courts 
should administer justice “in the name of the German people,” 18 as well as 
the decree of March 15, in which it was stated that all civil servants in ser¬ 
vice at that time, or to be appointed in the future, had to take the following 
oath: “ I swear that I shall be loyal and obedient to Adolf Hitler, the Ftihrer 
of the German Reich and People, and that I shall observe the laws and con¬ 
scientiously fulfill the duties of my office, so help me God. 1J len days 
before the plebiscite, namely, on March 31, 1938, a Reich Propaganda Office 
was created in Vienna. 20 Thus, having incorporated the Austrian Army on 
March 13, 1938, and having sworn in the entire civil administration, which 
was required to collaborate in the control of the plebiscite, Hitler could 
quietly await its results. 

The plebiscite was carried out on April 10, 193 ®- Formally 99.08 pei 
cent of the votes were given in favor of annexation. It is obvious that under 
these conditions the plebiscite was not carried out as an expression of the 
free will of the Austrian people. 

III. Administration 

In accordance with the law of April 14, I939. 21 the territory of Austria was 
divided into districts (Gpite), in compliance with the German pattern of 
administration. Eight districts were created, namely, the District of 
Vienna, comprising the city of Vienna; the District of Carinthia, comprising 
the former Austrian province of Carinthia, with its seat in Klagenfurt; the 
District of the Lower Danube, comprising the former Austrian province of 
Lower Austria, with its seat in Kreins-on-the-Danube; the District of the 
Upper Danube, comprising the former Austrian province of Upper Austria, 
with its seat in Linz; the District of Salzburg, comprising the former Aus¬ 
trian province of Salzburg, with its seat in Salzburg; the District of Styria, 
comprising the former Austrian province of Styria, with its seat in Graz; 
the District of Tyrol, comprising the former Austrian province of Tyrol, 
with its seat in Innsbruck. The former Austrian province of Vorarlberg 
was made a separate administrative district and autonomous corporation, 
to be supervised by the Reich Governor in Tyrol. 

At the head of every- district is a Reich governor (ReichsslaUhalter). With¬ 
in the area of the district the Reich governor conducts the administration 
under the supervision of the Reich Minister of the Interior and in accordance 
with directives of other Reich ministers in their respective spheres of juris¬ 
diction. The authorities of the Reich special administrations within the 
area of the district, with the exception of the Reich justice, finance, railway, 
and postal administrations, are subordinated to the Reich governor. 

i» See below, p. 293. ” See below, p. 286. 

so See below, p. 287. " See below, p. 288. 



The administration of the Reich District of Vienna is divided under a 
special provision into a state administration and a municipal administration. 
For administrative purposes the districts are in general divided into counties 
and municipalities. At the head of the county is the prefect (Land-rat). At 
the head of the municipality is the burgomaster. 

The Austrian administration of justice was merged with the German ad¬ 
ministration of justice. The Supreme Court of Austria in Vienna was 
abolished by decree of February 28, I939, 22 and the jurisdiction of this court 
was transferred to the Reichsgericht in Leipzig. The duties of the Attorney 
General before the Supreme Court of Austria were transferred to the At¬ 
torney General at the Reichsgericht. The courts of lower jurisdiction 
received the same designations as in Germany. The provincial and circuit 
courts were designated Landgerichte and the precinct courts Amtsgerichte.™ 

A special state tribunal, the members of which were to be appointed by the 
Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor, was created in Vienna by law of August 17, 
I 93 ^» 24 m order to try members of the former Austrian Federal Government 
and their associates, as well as burgomasters of the city and their associates, 
for acts “inimical to the people.” The indictment was to be filed “in the 
name of the German people” by the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of 
Austria with the German Reich. 25 In addition to the penalties to be im¬ 
posed by this tribunal, the Reich Minister of the Interior was authorized to 
act independently, that is, he was empowered to withdraw the civil rights 
of the persons found guilty, to deprive them of citizenship, and to confiscate 
their property. 

In furtherance of the principle that vocational education should have 
preference over liberal arts education, an order was issued on May 31, 1940, 
elaborating Austria’s system of vocational schools. 26 This emphasis upon 
vocational education may be explained by war conditions. However, in the 
particular case of Austria the preference given to vocational over general 
(liberal arts) education was designed to destroy humanistic thinking, which 
might give foundations for national thinking. Thus the new school system 
was only one of the instrumentalities intended for the intellectual and 
political absorption of Austria. 

IV. International Status of Austria 

The Anschluss of Austria involves several problems of international law: 

I. Hitler displayed a disregard for the principle of non-intervention in the 
internal affairs of other countries by requesting that Nazi leaders should 

n See below, p. 295. * See decree of August 2, 1938, below, p. 294. 

24 See below, p. 294. 

u A temporary office, which lasted until the division of Austria into districts ( Gaue). 
See above, pp. 110, 111. 

M See below, p. 296. This decree relates also to the Sudetenland. 

international status 


form a part of the Schuschnigg cabinet, by demanding that the Schuschnigg 
plebiscite should be prohibited, and by requesting the resignation 

its treaty with Austria of July by the 

terms of which it obligated itself to respect the^ o Ausma and 
to consider National Socialism as an internal problem of Austria. By his 
treaty the principle of non-intervention in the relations between the two 
treaty tne pnn P ,t re nethened, and therefore Germany s interven- 

countries was specifically strenginencu, * , vinlartrm of 

tion in behalf of National Socialism m Austria became not only a violation c 
recognized principles of international law. but also a violate.,, of a specific 

" Thediird article of the above-mentioned treaty, stating that Austria's 
“ i i,v,; and its oolicy towards Germany in particular shall be con 

stentlyguSed by the principle that Austria recognizes herself to be a German 
State ” *« requires some comment. 11 may be understood as a reference to 
the fact that the population of Austria is of German origin and speaks the 
r TIL,! On the same basis, a German-speaking canton in 

Switzerland w ould’be able to make a similar statement By making such a 
statement how ever, no implications would be created or that canton as to 
i . • hL or nllpiriance to other states of German culture. In somewhat 
the same sense any Latin American country would be able to declare itself a 
Latin American state, without infringing upon the idea of its sovereignty 
The third article is thus irrelevant from the point of view of international 
L It did not impose any particular obligations upon Austria. t has 
the character only of a generally conceived declaration without legal con¬ 
sequences In the light of later developments, however, it would appear 
Sat Hitler, in concluding this agreement, made mental reservations in rela- 
I on to Austria From that point of view the article was a premeditated 
orTparattn on his part of pretexts for later declaring himself protector of 
"the whole German people, whose sons we all are, wherever we may have 

b T Tte Anschluss of Austria was likewise a violation of Article 80 of the 
f \r *n 30 as well as the Covenant of the League of Nations, 
Treaty of Vers , pendence of all of its members, including Aus- 

" g Thc“ c, that Germany had retired from the League of Nations be- 

. o 28 Volkerbund (Geneva), VII, No. 11-12 (March, I 93 8 )» P- I 5 °- 

“‘Hitler's speech in the ^“^now^cdgManifwd? respect’strictly the independence of 
jo “Article So. Germany t^kjWW a Treaty between that State and the 

Austria, within the frontiers " hl ' : h agrees that this independence shall be malien- 
Principal Allied and Associated Po^. she a^ee eof Nations .“ 

able, except with the consent of the Counci tne fc, t respect an d preserve as 

■ “ Article io. The “^^'inSy and existing political independence of all 
against external aggression the temtona ^ ( K ; ion or in case of any threat or danger 

Strapo^h. ™.n. by which .hi. obh P ,„n .h.U 

be fulfilled ” 



fore the invasion of Austria did not change the obligation of other members 
of the League “to respect and preserve as against external aggression'' 
Austrian territorial integrity and political independence. 

4. Both plebiscites—that announced by Schuschnigg and that carried out 
by Hitler—are irrelevant from the point of view of international law. Accord¬ 
ing to Article 88 of the Treaty of St. Germain, 32 the independence of Austria 
is inalienable and changes in its international status could be validly under¬ 
taken only with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations. Neither 
Austria itself nor another power could legally organize a plebiscite contrary 
to the Treaty of St. Germain, in order to decide as to Austria's sovereignty. 
Aside from the cited express provisions of international treaties, it is a clear 
violation of international law for one country to invade another country 
and to try to validate the incorporation of the invaded country into its 
own by a specially organized plebiscite under the protection of its invading 

5. Disregarding these legal considerations, it is obvious that under the 
conditions above set forth the plebiscite was not carried out as an expression 
of the free will of the Austrian people. If Hitler believed that a plebiscite 
was a solution of the problem involved, he should have awaited the results of 
the plebiscite announced by Schuschnigg for the 13th of March. Having 
two Nazi members in the Schuschnigg cabinet (Dr. Seyss-Inquart, now 
Reich Commissioner for the Netherlands, and Dr. Skubl), he would have 
been able to ascertain* whether the plebiscite as ordered by Schuschnigg was 
conducted with fairness and accuracy. Moreover, as already noted, the law 
calling the plebiscite, by announcing the annexation of Austria, converted 
the issue in effect from a question to be decided by the free w ill of the people 
into an affirmative fact. And since the Anschluss law w'as promulgated 
before the plebiscite and did not contain a resilient clause to the effect that 
the incorporation would be invalid if the plebiscite were decided in favor of 
Austria's independence, one must consider that the plebiscite w as conceived 
by Hitler as a mere formality, organized and prepared for the purpose of 
covering the real character of the invasion. 

6. The recognition dejure of the Anschluss by some states was in violation 
of the Covenant of the League of Nations. In accordance with the provi¬ 
sions of Article 16, the members of the League of Nations w'ere obliged to 
act against the aggressor and not help such aggressor by recognition. Setting 
aside the problem of whether and how far recognition of a state by other 
states is relevant as to the evaluation of its juridical existence or non-exist¬ 
ence, the de jure recognition of the Anschluss was in violation of the Cove- 

w "Article 88 . The independence of Austria is inalienable otherwise than with the 
consent of the Council of the League of Nations. Consequently Austria undertakes in the 
absence of the consent of the said Council to abstain from any act which might directly or 
indirectly or by any means whatever compromise her independence, particularly, and 
until her admission to membership of the League of Nations, by participation in the affairs 
of another Power.” 



nant of the League of Nations. Guided by the principles of the non¬ 
recognition doctrine, the United States of America has not recognized the 
Anschluss de jure. The recognition was only de factoP Other states have 
not only not recognized the Anschluss but have filed protests with the League 
of Nations against it. 84 

Thus, while the basic facts are that Austria was invaded and occupied bv 
military action,-it is submitted that the Anschluss was illegal from the point 
of view of international law-; that the sovereignty of Austria has not been 
destroyed but only suspended; 85 and that as soon as the occupant is driven 
from the territory of Austria, that country’s sovereignty will be automati¬ 
cally restored to it. 86 

83 Garner, in an article on “ Questions of State Succession Raised by the German Annexa¬ 
tion of Austria," states that the United States could not recognize the incorporation of 
Austria because of the doctrine laid down in the convention on the rights and duties of 
states (Montevideo, 1933), the Anti-War Pact of Rio de Janeiro, also of 193?. and the con¬ 
vention on the fulfillment of existing treaties (Buenos Aires, I 93 6 )- American Journal of 
International Law, Vol. 32 (> 938 ), P- 421- The author of the present work does not share 
this view The Pan American treaties referred to are limited to territorial changes effected 
bv force in the territories of the contracting states and do not apply to territorial changes 
which take place outside the territories of the contracting parties. See Articles It, 2, and I, 
resoectivelv of the above-mentioned treaties, International Conferences of American Stales, 
First Supplement, 1033-194° (, Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 

19 Austria not’beingTparty to the aforementioned treaties, was therefore not protected by 
them" Only the following European countries have deposited ratifications of adherence 
fT. Ant! War Pact of 1933 : Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Finland, Rumania, Spain, and 
Yugoslavia ‘ V See Status ofthiFan American Treaties and Conventions (Revised to January i, 
1043 bv the Juridical Division of the Pan American Union). 

9 &See letter from the Mexican Delegation to the Secretary General of the League of 

^'■^The Mexiwn’Government, 9 which has always upheld the principles of the Covenant and 
in accordance with its consistent international policy refuses to recognise any conquest made 
by force enters the most emphatic protest against the external aggression of which the 
Austrian Republic has just been the victim. It informs the public opinion of the world 
that iff its view the only means of securing peace, and preventing further international out- 
suc j, a s those that have been committed against Ethiopia, Spain, China, and Austria, 
isfor the nations to carry out the obligations laid upon them bv the Covenant the treaties 
hev have concluded and the principles of international law. Otherwise it will not be long 
they have ; s overw helmcd b.y a far worse conflagration than that which it is sought 

m^avoid'ljy^tfempt^'actior^outside^the League system.” - League of Nations, Official 

de ^InternaUona^ Lw^Voi. iV 176: “*Thus in practice, upon the withdrawal 
See Hyde, normal government of the State resumes automatically the 

lr^ deemcd t0 haVC beGn SUSpendGd ratHer tHan 

t rhanter wfaTcomple^fthe^Conference of Foreign Secretaries of the United 
After this chap Kincdom and the Soviet Union, which met at Moscow from 

States of Amenca t 2 issued a declaration concerning the restoration of an 

!n h 3jnV“.^ 

I9 iVV/ ol l^ WB: rtmont’Q of the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and the United States of 

10 “ * v “” 10 m, “' 

shall be liberated from German do^ticm. Germany on March 15th, 1938, 

“ Njey regard theif in no way bound by any changes effected in 

as null and void. The> dec } are that they wish to see reestablished a free and inde- 

Austria since that date. y way for the Austrian people themselves, as well as 

tCe wiffbc faced with similar problems, to find that political and 

economic'security which is the only basis for lasting peace. 


“Austria is reminded, however, that she has a responsibility which she cannot evade for 
participation in theovar on the side of Hitlerite Germany, and that in the final settlement 
account will inevitably be taken of her own contribution to her liberation." Department of 
State, Bulletin , Vol. IX, No. 228 (November 6, 1943), p. 3 10 *. 

The last paragraph of this text raises the question of Austrian responsibility for partici¬ 
pation in the present war on the side of Germany. Here it may be observed that Austria, 
unlike Albania, Slovakia, or Croatia, was not organized by the Axis as a puppet state with a 
quasi-international personality, but was completely absorbed by Germany politically as 
well as administratively (see above). The Austrians who have been participating in this 
war on the side of Germany were mobilized under the German conscription laws. Thus it 
was by Germany, not by Austria, that these people were mobilized, and the question of the 
responsibility of Austria would not seem to arise. Those former Austrian citizens, however, 
who assisted Hitler in taking over the country, in Nazifying it, and in oppressing their fel¬ 
low citizens, should be considered personally responsible for their acts. 



(Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) 

The three Baltic States, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, granted to 
Russia military bases on their own territories in November and December, 
1939. In June, 1940, these states were occupied and incorporated into the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as autonomous soviet republics of 
Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. A communist regime was gradually intro¬ 
duced into these countries up to the date of their occupation by Germany. 


After Germany occupied the Baltic States in June and July, I94 1 . 1 during 
the course of the war with Russia, each of these states was organized as a gen¬ 
eral commissariat, with headquarters in the capital of the respective state. 
Thus there were organized a General Commissariat for Lithuania, “ wit 1 
headquarters in Kaunas, a General Commissariat for Latvia, with head¬ 
quarters in Riga, and a General Commissariat for Estonia with headquarters 
in Tallinn. These three general commissariats, together with a fourth 
called General Commissariat for White Russia ■■ composed one Reich Com¬ 
missariat for the Ostland, with headquarters in Riga. The Reich Com¬ 
missariat Ostland, as well as other territories occupied in Russia, was super¬ 
vised by a specially created Ministry for the Territories Occupied in the 
Fast with headquarters in Berlin. An intimate collaborator of Hitler, 
Alfred Rosenberg, author of the book Der Mylhus des 20 Jahrhunderts, 
was named Reich Minister for the Territories Occupied m the East 
In the Baltic States the administration is m the hands of the Reich Co 
missioner for the Ostland. In each Baltic state there is also a Commissioner 
General who handles the administration in each individual state, chief com¬ 
missioners who supervise administration of special regions or special branches, 
“strict commissioners who are responsible for the admimstration m 
the smaller territorial units. However, the former administrative division 
was n"t continued but in its stead larger administrative districts or regions 
(GeHete) were created with a chief commissioner at the head of each region. 

. ^ u j; n Morrh icno. occupied and incorporated Merael Terri- 

tSE Lithuanian ....a sov„,ign„ Mow. Chapter on 

“ 1 !^ 

Poland by Germany and Russia P' rt Q f t | ie Wilno province. 

^^WowS'e^'Poland ■' and "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." 



Thus in Lithuania the country's twenty-seven administrative districts were 
grouped in six larger Gebieie} 


To a certain extent the local population has been called upon to partici¬ 
pate in the administration. Administration by the local population (Lan- 
deseigenc Verwaltung) is headed in each of the states by a group of department 
chiefs, who have the title of general councillors in Lithuania, general direc¬ 
tors in Latvia, and directors in Estonia. These departmental chiefs are 
appointed by the commissioners general in conjunction with the Reich 
Commissioner for the Ostland. The departmental chiefs receive directions 
from and are strictly supervised by the office of the Commissioner General 
in each state. The participation of the local population in the lower bracket, 
that is, in the districts, is effected by district elders (einheimische Kreisal- 
teste). These district elders are appointed from the local population by the 
Commissioner General in each country, on the recommendation of the de¬ 
partmental chiefs. Just as the departmental chiefs receive directions from 
and are supervised by the German commissioners general, the district elders 
receive their instructions from and are supervised by the German district 

Administration in the urban and rural communities is carried out by 
special leaders, who are assisted in the towns by town councillors (Siadtrdte) 
and in the rural communities by parish councillors (Gemeinderate ). All 
these officials are appointed by the German administration, on recommenda¬ 
tion of the district leaders, from the local administration . 4 


A German Superior Court for all the Ostland was established at the head¬ 
quarters of the Reich Commissioner, and at the headquarters of each Com¬ 
missioner General a German court was established for his jurisdictional 
district. In addition a special court is associated with each German court. 
German courts have jurisdiction over all criminal cases except when these 
have been referred to another court for judgment; they have civil jurisdic¬ 
tion when a German citizen or a German by descent ( Volkszugehdriger ) is a 
party to the case. In addition the Reich Commissioner may in his discre¬ 
tion expressly define the jurisdiction of the German tribunals. From deci¬ 
sions of the lower German courts in the occupied areas an appeal lies to the 
German Superior Court. The special courts have such jurisdiction as is 

3 See mimeographed Current News on the Lithuanian Situation. Compiled by the Lithu¬ 
anian Legation, Washington (June, 1943), Vol. II, 6 (30), p. 3. 

4 See Latvia under German Occupation , 1941-1943. With a Preface by Dr. Alfred Bilmams, 
Minister of Latvia to the United States (Washington: Press Bureau of the Latvian Legation, 
>943). PP- 3-12. 




expressly defined in the laws of the Reich or in the laws of the Ostland. 6 
According to established principles, the jurisdiction of special courts is 
always defined by the decree, which fixes penalties. Thus, it is a jurisdic¬ 
tion a casu ad casum. There are also courts martial, with the normal juris¬ 
diction of German courts martial. 6 

In the German court as described above only one judge is required for 
decisions; in the German Superior Court, three judges, except as otherwise 
prescribed; and in the special court, one presiding judge and two associates. 
The associates of the special court must, 14 as far as practicable have the 
qualifications for the office of judge.” But the insertion of the phrase as 
far as practicable” makes it obvious that the qualifications of a judge are 
not an absolute prerequisite. The associates are appointed by the C om¬ 
missioner General for one year, from the ranks of German citizens or Ger¬ 
mans by descent resident in the district of the special court. In some cases 
the presiding judge of the Superior Court may decide without oral process. 
Representation by counsel is not compulsory. Any Reich German or 
German by descent who '‘offers surety for an adequate defense” may be 
admitted as defense counsel. Thus it would appear that he need not be a 
practising lawyer. 

The right of appeal is limited. In criminal cases it is allowed only when a 
more severe penalty than one month’s imprisonment or five hundred marks 
fine has been imposed; in civil cases, when the right of appeal ‘ has been 
expressly granted by the judgment,” the meaning of which is that a judge 
a quo decides whether his judgment may be reviewed by the Superior Court. 
Jews may not seek legal recourse against the decision of a German court. 7 

The local courts have been allowed to continue in so far as their activities 
are not in conflict with the organization of German justice. The verdicts of 
local courts are passed ‘‘in the name of the law”; and final decisions of such 
courts may be reexamined by the German Superior Court, on motion by the 
Commissioner General. The German Superior Court “may confirm the 
decision of the local courts, or itself decide the matter differently, or, after 
cancelling the decision, delegate the case” to a German court or to another 

The German courts in the Baltic States apply German criminal law to the 
same extent as in other occupied countries. As the principle of analogy in 
criminal law was introduced in the German Criminal Code in 1935, 9 n ° le S a J 
guaranties have been given the local population as to previous knowledge o 
the criminal nature of an act. This provision regarding German criminal 

»See order of October 6 , 1941. below, p. 303. 6 See above. Part I, •‘Courts.” 

7 See order of October 6 , J 94 *.’ °e °'S’ j Nation of iu stice by the local judicial authorities 

Occupation, op. cit ., p. J 6 . 

See above, Part I, Law. 



law, in conjunction with the limitations regarding review and defense, creates 
in fact a state of lawlessness and places the population completely at the 
mercy of the German administration. 


1 he problem of property became complicated because of the special regime 
of property which was introduced in the Baltic States after their incorpora¬ 
tion into the U.S.S.R. Since the bulk of the property under the communist 
regime belongs to the state or to collective economic associations, it was 
possible for the German occupant to seize immediately a large number of 
properties, organized in special forms of economic concentration (, sovhos , 
kolhos , combine, trust). 

By the order of August 18, 1941, 10 the Reich Commissioner for the Ost- 
land declared that "the German Civil Administration takes over all of the 
real and personal property situated in the territories administered by the 
Reich Commissioner for the Ostland which belongs to the Union of Soviet 
Socialist Republics, its member states, public corporations, associations, 
and partnerships, including all claims, investments, rights, and interests of 
all kinds as of June 20,1941." These properties were put under the adminis¬ 
tration of special trustees. 11 Because of the great number of such trustees 
an especially elaborate system of control became necessary. Special public 
records were established in which the names of the trustees are entered for 
the information of the public. For the duration of the sequestration of 
property no legal processes for the satisfaction of creditors of any given 
property are permitted. Severe penalties, including the death penalty, are 
to be imposed upon persons interfering with the administration of the seques¬ 
trated properties. 

As to private property, which survived to a certain extent in the Baltic 
States, the occupant gave its first attention to Jewish owners. An order 
was issued on October 13, 1941,-2 to the effect that Jewish property would 
be subject to sequestration, trustee administration, and confiscation. Only 
the following were exempted from seizure: (a) that part of the household 
furniture which is used for essential personal needs; and ( b ) cash, bank, and 
savings credits up to a total of one hundred Reichsmarks. 


When the German Army moved into the then Russian-held territories in • 
June, 1941, it found a communistic regime which had been entrenched more 
or less deeply according to the duration of the regime in a given area. The 
Baltic States of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia had been under a Russian 

10 See below, p. 301. 

p '^ rder co-remingsequestration of the property of the U.S.S.R., August 19, 1941, below, 

11 See below, p. 307. 



regime for one year, from June, 1940* to June, 1 94 1 * while the eastern Polish 
territories had been under Russian administration since September, 1 939 ^ 
but the remainder of the territories had been under a communist regime since 
1917 and 1918. It is thus obvious that this regime was more deeply en¬ 
trenched in the latter territories and that private property was more com- 
munized in them than in the territories held by the U.S.S.R. for one or two 

In his first proclamation to the population the Reich Commissioner for the 
Ostland denounced the communist system, stating in his proclamation of 
July 28, 1941, 13 that “Bolshevism was threatening all Europe. ... If this 
world enemy had been rampant among you a few more years, nothing would 
have been left to you of your property and people.” It was also stated in the 
proclamation that the Germans had made sacrifice of their blood in order to 
overthrow “the Bolshevik universal enemy” and that the German people 
have “therefore now assumed the duty and the right to make such arrange¬ 
ments that never again will a similar danger be able to threaten anew the 
traditions of the people of Europe, and indeed their whole existence.” This 
proclamation therefore encouraged the hope on the part of the local popula¬ 
tion that their private properties would be restored to them. However, in 
the first executive regulation concerning the reorganization of handicrafts, 
issued on December 23, 1941, in connection with the decree of October 17, 
1941, 14 concerning the reorganization of handicrafts, small industry and the 
retail trade, the Commissioner General in Riga announced that in order to 
avoid excessive disturbances in the normal economic life by the measures 
taken for restoration of private property, the abolition of the Bolshevik 
system should take place step by step only. The reason for the change in 
attitude of the occupant is the following: the communistic system seemed 
useful for the German war economy, since it provided for the German war 
effort a concentration of resources and wealth and a centralized form of con¬ 
trol. The existing institutions of economic concentration, such as collective 
farms ( kolhozy ) and state farms ( sovhozy ) and industrial associations such as 
combines, cartels, and trusts, were considered by the occupant as appropriate 
instrumentalities for taking over immediately the whole economy of the 
area. Although in the Baltic States and eastern Poland communism had 
not, as already indicated, become deeply entrenched, because of the relatively 
short time in which those territories were held by Russia, and the inhabi¬ 
tants were keenly interested in regaining possession of their properties, the 
occupant nevertheless, for reasons of economic expediency, disregarded this 
socio-political element in dealing with property. 

A return to private property was envisaged to a certain extent only in the 
Baltic States. 15 But even in the Baltic States a return of properties in the 

» See below, p. 300. 14 See below, p. 308. 16 See above, Part I, 14 Property.” 



handicraft and other small industries and in the retail trade was made 
dependent upon two principles: (i) It must be in the “public interest” 
to return private property; and (2) the owner must be personally and pro¬ 
fessionally qualified to manage the property. Properties which would lose 
in efficiency and output in the hands of a private owner or by redistribution 
between or among the several owners were not to be handed over to those to 
whom they rightfully belonged. 

The following procedure for the return to private property was provided 
for: A formal -and detailed application is required, and in the event of a 
favorable decision the permit for restoration of the property specifies the 
date on which the property in question is to be separated from the collective 
or state institution (combine, trust, or public enterprise). Machinery and 
other equipment formerly belonging to the owners of small industrial estab¬ 
lishments are to be returned to the owner free of charge. As to raw materi¬ 
als on hand in the plants and all products in process of manufacture, the 
following arrangement is made: Raw materials and products up to the value 
of one thousand Reichsmarks become the property of the owner to whom the 
plant is restored. Materials and products in excess of this amount may be 
acquired by the said owner upon payment therefor. He may also acquire 
finished products but he must pay for them at prices established by evalua¬ 

As to claims and obligations incurred during the combined or collective 
operation of the plant, no responsibility therefor is assumed by the owner to 
whom the plant is restored. 

Regarding employment contracts, it is stated that they are unaffected by 
the change in ownership, and the new owner and the workers and employees 
must obtain permission from the district commissioner if they wish to termi¬ 
nate the contract. A special clause provides for the continuity of work 
by the stipulation that the termination of the employment contract cannot 
take effect before one month has elapsed from the time of the separation of 
the plant from the former combine or collective establishment. 

That the occupant did not envisage primarily the principle of restoration 
of private property is obvious from regulations concerning reorganization 
of small industry issued in connection with the decree of October 17, I 94 1 * 16 
According to these regulations, an application for return of property to the 
previous owners shall not be approved when it involves the partition of a 
collective enterprise if there is reason to fear that the partition will result in 
the creation of small businesses unable to carry on. In those circumstances, 
however, a transformation is permitted of the communistically organized 
enterprise into a joint establishment based upon a partnership agree- 

lfi For a general orientation as to the system of return to private property, see “ Wie wird 
reprivatisiert?” in Deutsche Zeitung ini Osten, February 17, * 94 2 * See also Latvia under 
German Occupation , cited above. 



ment In such a case, the Director for Latvian Small Industry is authorized 

the decree 3 December ,5. . 94 .," of the Reich Com«£ 0 »» ^ ^ 
land, author^the.districtdid no. 

olcn,eri E t^^ 

- ■ssr.-jsss? 

commissioners may not grant the use and adm.mstrat.on of sod ^ 
they find that such an act would be contra.y to c puJ ^ j ,| 1C 

are no guaranties [or an orderly adm.mstrat.on and■■"“>*“““? 
house, or if there are doubts as to the integrity o it m j ss j oners . 

This provision, granting wide discretionary power to distri f 

makes it possible for them to use the rights of owners as an ^rumenta ty 
special policies within the limits, on the one hand, of econo i *P 
and, on the other hand, of political submission to the occupant. The^ 
the district commissioner to revoke the privilege of management and use o ce 
granted, increases not only the atmosphere of insecurity but also the absolute 
and constant dependence of the former owners on the German admimstra 
tion. Disadvantageous as this situation may be to the former owners the 
occupant, in addition, has neglected no occasion to create fiscal advantage 
for himself through this institution of granted management and use., 
though the owners are not restored in their ownership rights, they are obliged 
to pay public taxes devolving on such city buildings, houses, and sites. 


The exploitation of labor is one of the main objectives of the occupant. 
The local manpower is being exploited in a twofold way: first, by utilizing it 
in local industrial or farming establishments to supplement the German war 
economy; and second, by shipping millions of workers into Germany In 
the Ostland all workmen, domestic workers, persons engaged ,n independent 
trades, and members of their families who are also m trade or in housework 
must possess work books.'* Labor can be employed only with the permis¬ 
sion of the German district commissioner.” Labor contracts may not be 
7 . . . , . thpr nartv without authorization from the same source. 

r s m ^hibtd1rXe y a worker to give up his job by offering higher 

u Firsts anJ regulations of January 3 i. .942, under the order concerning the pooling 

° f SSd December «. 1941. concerning engagement of and notice to workers as 
well as prevention of breach of contract and enticement. 



wages or better working conditions elsewhere. As to fanning, there is an 
obligation imposed on every farmer to utilize his own labor resources. 20 
Y\ hen Jews are employed, they do not receive any wages; but the employer 

of Jewish labor must pay a fee to the financial department of the district 
commissioner. 21 


Because of the concentration and reorganization of economy by the Rus¬ 
sian authorities during their stay of a year in the Baltic States, the German 
occupant was able to take hold immediately of all the economic resources of 
these countries. Having been taken over in a short time (by a real Blitz- 
kricg), no great disturbances occurred in the economy of these countries when 
the German occupant moved in. The occupant proceeded to make invento¬ 
ries of raw materials, agricultural products, and livestock. All transactions 
in these materials were prohibited. Agricultural products such as grain, 
sheep wool, and even poultry had to be delivered to the occupant according 
to especially elaborate orders and schedules. 

» °f M brU u ary I0 ’ I942f conce . rn »ng effective distribution of agricultural labor. 

Distdcf oi Utvfa. sE 1 below 9 p 2, 3 C i°, nCernmg remuneration t0 I"** labor in the General 



Belgium was invaded by Germany on May io, 1940. When the King sur¬ 
rendered with his army, his legal status became, and has since remained, that 
of a prisoner of war. Thus the King does not participate in public affairs 
of the occupied country. 


Two provinces of Belgium which belonged to Germany before 1918, Eupen 
and Malm&dy,. as well as neutral Moresnet, were incorporated into Germany 
and assigned for purposes of administration to the District of Aachen by 
decree of May 18, 1940. 1 Since then the institutions of these three districts 
have undergone a r6gime of assimilation with German political and cultural 
institutions. Germans living in these districts are represented in the Reichs¬ 
tag. 2 Inhabitants of “related blood,” i.e., those considered racially akin to 
Germans, were granted nationality of the inferior type (Staalsangehorige ), 
and German inhabitants were granted nationality of the superior type 
(Burger ). 3 Gradually the whole body of German and Prussian law was in¬ 
troduced into these districts. The official language was made German and 
names were changed to a German form. 


The remainder of Belgium was put under the administration of one mili¬ 
tary commander for the German armed forces in Belgium and Northern 
France, including Pas-de-Calais. Because of the strategic importance of the 
area, 4 the administration was entrusted to a military commander instead of 
to a civilian Reich Commissioner. 

The general staff of the Military Commander is divided into two separate 
staffs: the military staff ( Militar-odcr Kommandostab ) and the staff for mili¬ 
tary administration (Militarvenvaltungsstab). The military staff, headed by 
the Chief of Staff, is in charge of purely military matters. The staff for mil¬ 
itary administration, headed by a Chief of Military Administration, handles 
economic and cultural matters of the occupied areas. This staff contains 
three divisions: Division of the Chief (. Prasidialabtcilung ), Administrative 
Division (Venvaltungsabteilung), and Division for Economics ( Wirtschafts - 
ableilung). The Division of the Chief handles general and political matters. 

1 See below, p. 313. 2 See Act of February 4, 1941, below, p. 315. 

*See decree of May 23, 1940, below, p. 313. 

« See Dr. Ilailer, member of the staff of the Military Commander in Brussels. “ Die Mili- 
tarverwaltung in Belgien und Nordfrankfreich," Deutsches Recht, 1940, Vol. 45/461 p. 1916. 



The Administrative Division is divided into sections for political administra¬ 
tion, communal administration, social welfare, police, communications, press 
and radio, finance, justice, schools, culture, health, building of roads, and the 
administration of waterways. The Division for Economics deals with all 
matters pertaining to the economic life of the country. 

In the cities of Brussels, Ghent, Li6ge, and Charleroi chief field commands 
(Oberfeldkommandanturen) were created for the administration of the re¬ 
spective cities and adjacent provinces. The chief field commanders act 
through subordinate field commands ( Feldkommandanturen ), usually three 
in number, and the latter in turn also have an average of three local com¬ 
mands ( Ortskommandanturen ) under them. 

Special city commissioners were appointed for the administration of Brus¬ 
sels, Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend, and Li6ge. 

Apart from the administrative agencies of the occupant, the Belgian ad¬ 
ministration is in the hands of the secretaries general of the former Belgian 
ministries. 6 The following secretaries general are functioning, namely, those 
of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Labor 
and Social Welfare, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Ministry of 
Communications, and the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The local au¬ 
thorities perform their functions mainly in accordance with the pre-war 
Belgian pattern. However, the elective element in government has been 
curtailed. A shakeup among officials was undertaken at the beginning by 
introducing an order that persons over sixty years of age could not hold 
office. 6 In this order the German military command referred especially to 
opening public offices to demobilized Belgian soldiers who wanted to serve 
their country with energy and in full realization of their responsibility.” In 
taking care of the demobilized soldiers of a defeated army, the occupant had 
two purposes in mind: first, the occupant wished to gain popularity; and sec¬ 
ondly, by this policy an opportunity was afforded to the German authorities 
to scrutinize politically every candidate for a public office, even though the 
actual appointments were made through the channels of the secretaries 

The local administration is supervised by representatives of the nearest 
German military command. 


The occupant immediately organized a special system for taking over the 
economic resources of the country. Economic officers ( Wirtschaftsoffiziere ) 
followed the troops in order to take possession of the raw materials and fac¬ 
tories. Sequestration was ordered of foodstuffs, raw materials, semi-fabri- 
cated products, as well as some finished products such as woolen clothing, 

5 The nature of this form of central government, which is called “headless” or “sub¬ 
cabinet” government, has been explained above, pp. 11-12. 

c See order of March 7, 1941, below, p. 320. 



jute bags, tires, industrial oils, and so on.’ For purposes of industrial pro¬ 
duction commodity control agencies (Warenstellen )were organized, with wide 
powers to issue regulations concerning acquisition, distribution, storing 
serving, and consumption, and to require the submission of reports. 1 
commodity control agencies provided the factories with materials necessary 
for the manufacture of their products, if and when they were workrng for 
the German war economy. The factories also found themselves under the 
management of factory trustees appointed by the military commander 
11 was the duty of the factory trustees to see to the maintenance of industrial 
production and to execute orders of the occupying authorities as well as to 
undertake all measures for the purpose of increasing output. _ Moreover 
every enterprise in Belgium was made subject to audit by special orders 
the Chief of Military Administration, in order to keep the production of t e 

enterprises under constant control. , 

A special device was used in order to provide the occupant with non-ferrous 
metals. On October 20, I 94 1 . 9 a decree was published to the effect that 
persons delivering non-ferrous metals are entitled to a certain tax exemption. 
Thus the Belgian Treasury was compelled to collaborate with the occupant 
in obtaining non-ferrous metals and it is in fact the Belgian Treasury which 
pays for the scrap. 

A number of financial decrees gave to the occupant an especially privi¬ 
leged position in the field of finance. The proclamation of May 10, 1940, 10 
established an especially favorable exchange rate—one belga to one-half 
Reichsmark. The mark was fixed at 10 francs at the time of the invasion, 
after which it was raised to 12^ francs. Occupation currency ( Reicliskredit- 
kassenscheine ) was put into circulation and later on the Belgian Bank of 
Issue was compelled to exchange this occupation currency into new Belgian 
francs. AH Belgian banks were put under the control of a banking super¬ 
visory board 11 This office controls the business of the banks, especially 
credit operations. In particular, the banking supervisory office sees to it 
that credit is given to enterprises working for Germany. A clearing office 
was established in Brussels in order to carry on trade with Germany and, 
through German intermediaries, with other countries. The clearing arrange¬ 
ments between Germany and Belgium on the one side and, on the other, be¬ 
tween Belgium and other countries (which must be carried out through 
Berlin channels), are arranged by orders of the German military commander 
Thus German authorities decide which commodities Belgium shall export 
and import, what shall be the prices paid, and what exchange rate shall apply 
in every case Clearings have been established between Belgium and the 
following countries: the Netherlands, Italy, the Protectorate of Bohemia 
and Moravia, Switzerland, Sweden, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Noway, Hun- 
’ See order of Mav 20. 1940. below, p. gj. See also, + « 

' “’^ e orJer of June I4 ’ ,94 °’ bel0W ’ P ‘ 333 • 



gary, Denmark, the Government General of Poland, France, Rumania, Fin¬ 
land, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 12 (the last was interrupted 
because of the Russo-German war). 

For the regular functioning of clearing, it is necessary that exports shall 
be equal to imports on both sides, i.e., on the side of each party to the clear¬ 
ing agreement. But Germany imports from Belgium more than it exports 
there. Hence, in order to create a balance a credit item is entered in the 
central Clearing Institute ( Verrechnungskasse ) in Berlin in favor of the clear¬ 
ing office of Belgium. Germany thus becomes the clearing debtor of Bel¬ 
gium. The trade between Belgium and other countries is likewise carried out 
through the Clearing Institute in Berlin. However, this central clearing 
arrangement has not contributed to the unfreezing of Belgian credits by 
transferring to Belgium actual payments made to the Berlin Clearing Insti¬ 
tute by the countries importing Belgian goods, because—as in the case of her 
trade with Belgium—Germany is importing from those countries also more 
goods than she is exporting to them. 

The above-described economic and financial measures are facilitated by a 
complete control of all the economic life of Belgium, which was put into 
effect by the order concerning the organization of national economy, promul¬ 
gated by the secretaries general on February ro, 1941. 13 This order created 
the framework for economic totalitarianism in Belgium and furnished a basis 
for integrating the Belgian economy into the Germany economy. It en¬ 
visaged the creation of economic associations organized according to trades 
and regions. These associations are designated as sole official representa¬ 
tives of (he trade or region concerned. For example, all mining enterprises 
in Belgium are organized into one central mining association, with headquar¬ 
ters in Brussels. Moreover, all enterprises engaged in any economic activity 
in a particular area—citing Charleroi for example—such as mining enter¬ 
prises, retail trade and wholesale trade enterprises, handicraft associations, 
and banks, are organized in the Economic Chamber of Charleroi. Thus the 
economic life of Belgium is seized and controlled in a twofold manner: first, 
specific economic control of the “vertical” type, which directly affects 
the capital structure; and, secondly, general economic control organized 
horizontally on a geographic basis. 


During the occupation of 1914--18, Germany tried to disintegrate Belgium 
by creating and exaggerating differences between the Belgians and the 
Flemings, and the latter collaborating with Germany were given special 
privileges. When the German occupant left Belgium, the Belgian Govern- 

15 See International Chamber of Commerce, Clear inn <in,i Payments Agreements (Loose- 
leaf edition, Basel, Verlag fiir Recht und Gesellschaft AG.), passim. 
u See below, p. 323. 



ment passed legislation inflicting penalties upon persons who had collabo¬ 
rated with the Germans. During the present occupation, the German oc¬ 
cupant has published two orders for the “restitution of the rights of persons 
persecuted in Belgium because of their collaboration with the-German Army 
of Occupation during the war of 1914-18-” 14 To understand this it is neces¬ 
sary to recall that according to Section 5 of the Belgian Penal Coded 6 a 
person sentenced to death or to forced labor is deprived forever of “honor 
rights," which means the right of employment in public office, right to be 
elected, right to decorations and title of nobility, right to be a member of 
a jury, a court witness, a member of family council, a guardian, a member 
of the judiciary council, and an administrator of estates, as well as the right 
to bear arms, to be a member of the civil guard, or to serve in the army. 
The above-mentioned orders provide that these rights shall be restored. 
Moreover, the interested persons may receive special damages for personal 
sufferings, for loss of freedom, for expropriations, and so on. 

A special board, as an independent Belgian governmental institution, was 
created for allotting damages and reinstating such persons in their rights. 
The members of the board and their alternates are chosen with the consent 
of the German military commander. The costs of the reparations, as well 
as the expenses of the board, are to be borne by the Belgian State. 1 he 
Belgian Secretary of the Treasury is obliged to hold the amounts currently 
required for these purposes at the disposal of the board. Thus the Belgian 
Treasury has been compelled to pay compensation for penalties inflicted 
upon those who had been traitors to the Belgian nation in 1914-18. 

m See orders of September 6, 1940, below, pp. 338, 339. 

» See Code Penal in Les XV Codes (Brussels, 1928), p. 33 «- 



In the course of 1938 and 1939 the territory of the Republic of Czecho¬ 
slovakia was disposed of in the following way: 

In accordance with the Munich Agreement, the Sudetenland was in¬ 
corporated into Germany. Moreover, Germany also incorporated two 
areas in the neighborhood of Bratislava which dominated the strategic 
position of this city, namely, Devin and Petrzalka, inhabited by Slovaks. 

The Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was created within the bound¬ 
aries of the German Reich as an autonomous area comprising these two 

Slovakia was made a separate state and a special treaty of protection 
between Germany and Slovakia put the latter under the protection of Ger¬ 
many. According to this treaty, the area delimited on its western side by 
the frontiers of the state of Slovakia and on its eastern side by a line formed 
by the eastern rims of the Lower Carpathians, the White Carpathians, and 
the Javornik Mountains, was put under the “military sovereignty” of the 
German armed forces. 

By the Vienna arbitration award, Hungary incorporated the following 
Slovak 1 areas: 2 the entire districts of Stard Dala, Feledince, Krdlovsk# 
Chlumec, Komdrno, KoSice (city), Parkan, Dunajskd Streda, Zeliezovce; 
parts of the districts of Bratislava, Galanta, Modr£ Kamen, Velkd Ka- 
pu§any, KoSice, Krupina, Levice, Lufenec, Michalovce, Moldava nad 
Bodrou, Nitra, Revuca Roznava, Rimavskd Sobota, Sala, Samorfn, Tornala, 
TrebiSov, Trstend, Vrdble, Nov6 Zdmky. In implementation of the Vi¬ 
enna award, the frontiers between Slovakia and Hungary were rectified, 
and it was announced by Order No. 102,473/1939 of the Hungarian Royal 
Ministry of the Interior of March 13, 1939, that the following communities 
“shall hereafter come under the authority of the Hungarian Holy Crown: 3 
Vdga (Vdhovce), Als6jatt6 (Doln£ Jatov), Nagycdtdny (Veiled Cetfn), 
Kaldsz (Kalaz), Nagyhind (Velkd Hyndice), Bori (Bory), Hdvmdgyardd, 
Felsozello (Hornie Saliby), Alsopokordgy (Nizna Pokoradz), Pdddr (Pada- 
rovee), Felsofalu (Chvalovd), Rekenyevitdlu (Rekena), Andrdsi (Andra- 

1 One should bear in mind that after Munich the Republic of Czechoslovakia continued 
as a federative state, consisting of three autonomous divisions, Bohemia and Moravia, 
Slovakia, and Subcarpathia. This arrangement was helpful for the Germans during the 
final dismemberment of Czechoslovakia. 

* Seznam obci a okresu Republiky CeskoslovenskS (Stav ke dni 28. listopadu, 1938). Praha, 

*938, pp. 17 ff. 

8 The names of the additionally incorporated communities are given herein in the Hun¬ 
garian version according to the Hungarian decree. The Czech version is given in paren¬ 
thesis following the Hungarian names. The author is indebted to Dr. V. Palic, First Sec¬ 
retary of the Czechoslovak Embassy in Washington, for assistance in identifying the Czech 
names of these localities. 




Sovce), Aifalucska, J&szo (Jasov), Jdszomindszcnt (Poprod), Rudnok (Rud- 
nik), Aranyida—Reka (Zlata Idka), Mfezpest, Baj&nh&za (Bajany). 

Moreover, the Vienna arbitration allotted to Hungary the following entire 
districts or parts of districts belonging to Carpathian Ruthenia, or Sub- 
carpathia: the entire district of Berehovo; the city districts of Mukacevo 
and U^horod; parts of the districts of Ir§ava, MukaCevo, Sevlus, and Uz- 

The rest of Subcarpathia was also occupied and incorporated by Hungary 
in March, 1939. 

Parts of the following districts were ceded to Poland on October 2, 1938: 
from Moravia—FrySt&t, Fnfclek, < 5 esk£ TeSin; 4 from Slovakia—Cadca, 
Kezmarok (Javorina), Stard Lubovna, and SpiSska Stcird Ves. 

After the occupation of Poland by Germany, the first group of these areas 
was incorporated into Germany, namely, into the district of Silesia; the 
second group was allegedly turned back to Slovakia. 



The Sudeten were incorporated into the Greater German Reich following 
the Munich Agreement of September 29, 1938, which was signed by Ger¬ 
many, Italy, Great Britain, and France under threat of a German inva¬ 
sion of the Sudeten. Under the terms of this agreement, the Sudeten were 
incorporated into Germany and the new boundaries of the Czechoslovak 
State were to have been guaranteed by the four signatory powers. 5 This 
guaranty, however, was given neither by Italy nor by Germany. During 
the war of nerves which preceded the Munich Agreement Hitler declared 
that the Sudeten represented the last territorial demand that he had to 
make in Europe. 

The Munich Agreement was never recognized by the United States and 
Russia,® and it was subsequently denounced by Great Britain 7 and the 

4 See below, chapter on “ Poland.’* 

6 See Agreement and Annex, Great Britain, Foreign Office, Misc. No. 8 (1938), Cmd. 
5 8 48 - 

• Russia, however, recognized Slovakia and denied diplomatic status to the Czechoslovak 
Legation in Moscow during the winter 1939-40 and until after the German attack upon 
Russia, when the relations between the two countries were resumed. Hubert Ripka, The 
Repudiation of Munich (London: Czechoslovak Ministry of Foreign Affairs Information 
Service, 1943), P- 17 . 

7 See letter of Anthony Eden to M. Masaryk, “Exchange of Notes between His Majesty’s 
Government in the United Kingdom and the Government of the Czechoslovak Republic 
concerning the Policy of His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom in regard to 
Czechoslovakia,” Great Britain, Treaty Series , No. 3 (1942), p. 2: 

“Foreign Office, London, August 5 , 1942. 

41 Your Excellency, 

“In the light of recent exchanges of view between our Governments, I think it may be 
useful for me to make the following statement about the attitude of His Majesty's Govern¬ 
ment in the United Kingdom as regards Czechoslovakia. 



French National Committee. 8 It has been stated on other occasions that 
the Munich Agreement is invalid for the following reasons: 

1. The guaranty of the new Czechoslovakian boundaries, which was an 
essential element of the agreement, was not given by Germany and Italy, 
as mentioned above. 

2. This agreement was violated by the German invasion of Czechoslo¬ 
vakia. 9 

3. No consent of the Czechoslovak Parliament was obtained for the ces¬ 
sion of the territories, as is required by Article 64 of the Czechoslovak Con¬ 
stitution of February 29, 1920. 


In matters of administration, the Sudeten were disposed of in the following 
manner: From the main part was created a special district (Reichsgau 
Sudetenland ); the parts in the neighborhood of the districts of the Upper 
Danube ( Oberdonau ) and Lower Danube ( Niederdonau )—formerly part of 
Austria—were incorporated into these districts; and other parts were in¬ 
corporated into Prussia and Bavaria, respectively. 10 

The district of Sudetenland is headed by a Reich Governor (Reichsstatthal- 
ter) y having his official residence in Reichenberg. The Reich Governor is 
under the supervision of the Reich Minister of the Interior. He is also sub¬ 
ject to the instructions of the several Reich ministers for the respective 
branches of administration. All agencies of the special administrative serv- 

*' In my letter of the 18th July, 1941, I informed your Excellency that The King had de¬ 
cided to accredit an Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Dr. Benes as 
President of the Czechoslovak Republic. I explained that this decision implied that His 
Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom regarded the juridical position of the Presi¬ 
dent and Government of the Czechoslovak Republic as identical with that of the other 
Allied heads of States and Governments established in this country. The status of His 
Majesty's representative has recently been raised to that of an Ambassador. 

"The Prime Minister had already stated in a message broadcast to the Czechoslovak 
people on the 30th September, 1940, the attitude of His Majesty’s Government in regard 
to the arrangements reached at Munich in 1938. Mr. Churchill then said that the Munich 
Agreement had been destroyed by the Germans. This statement was formally communi¬ 
cated to Dr. Benes on the nth November, 1940. 

"The foregoing statement and formal act of recognition have guided the policy of His 
Majesty's Government in regard to Czechoslovakia, but in order to avoid any possible 
misunderstanding, I desire to declare on behalf of His Majesty’s Government in the United 
Kingdom that as Germany has deliberately destroyed the arrangements concerning Czecho¬ 
slovakia reached in 1938, in which His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom par¬ 
ticipated, His Majesty’s Government regard themselves as free from any engagements in 
this respect. At the final settlement of tne Czechoslovak frontiers to be reached at the end 
of the war they will not be influenced by any changes effected in and since 193S. 

" I have, &c. 

Anthony Eden.” 

8 Ripka, op. cit., pp. 13-14. 

"See Edvard Taborsky, "‘Munich,’ the Vienna Arbitration and International Law," 
Czechoslovak Yearbook of International Law (London, 1942), pp. 21-38; Quincy Wright, 
"The Munich Settlement and International Law," American Journal of International Law , 
Vol. 33 ( 1939 ). PP- 12-32. 

10 See 1 larry v. Rozvcki, " Ueber den Geltungsbereich des Reichsrechts im Grossdeutschen 
Reich," in Deutsche Vencaltutig , 1941, p. 55. 



ices of the Reich within the Reich District Sudetenland are under the Reich 
Governor, with the exception of justice, railways, and postal services. The 
Reich Governor is empowered to promulgate law with the consent of the 
Reich ministers involved. The Reich Governor has two deputies, namely, 
for general administration a so-called Government President, and for auton¬ 
omous administration of the district a District Chief ( Gauhauptmann ). 11 


After the incorporation of the Sudeten, the Germans in the Sudeten who 
were active under their leader Henlein, and who had brought about the 
Munich crisis, were rewarded in the form of reparations. A law signed by 
the Fiihrer, of October 20, 1939, 12 provided such reparations for Germans 
who incurred physical or property damages because they belonged to the 
Sudeten German party or because of their National Socialist convictions, 
or if the damages occurred in connection with the fight for the incorporation 
of the Sudetenland into the Reich. Such damages must have been caused 
through action of members of the armed forces or officials of the Czecho¬ 
slovak State or of political adversaries before January I, 1939. 

Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia 


On March 14, 1939, Hitler requested Prime Minister H&cha of the Czecho¬ 
slovak Government to come to see him. During that visit Hitler placed be¬ 
fore H&cha a memorandum which contained a renunciation of independence 
by Czechoslovakia and placed the country under the protectorate of Ger¬ 
many. These proposals were accompanied by threats of invasion and re¬ 
prisals. H&cha signed this agreement, 13 but, as facts have since shown, 

11 Act of April 14, 1939, below, d. 341. lJ Reichsgcsctzblatt , *939, I, p. 2119. 

13 The conditions under which H&cha and his Foreign Minister Chvalkovsky signed the 
agreement surrendering the sovereignty of their country are described in a report of M. Cou- 
londre, French Ambassador in Berlin, to M. Georges Bonnet, French Minister of Foreign 
Affairs, on March 17, 1939. as follows: 

“LJpon their arrival in Berlin, M. Dacha and his Minister were received with military 
honors and immediately taken to the Chancellery, where Herr Hitler, Field Marshal Go¬ 
ring, von Ribbentrop, and Keppler awaited them. On the table lay the document to be 
signed in its final form and a memorandum concerning the'proposed statute for Bohemia 
and Moravia. Hitler stated briefiv that the Czech Ministers were invited, not for negotia¬ 
tions but in order to be informed of Germany’s decisions, which were irrevocable: that 
Prague would be occupied on the following day at nine o'clock, Bohemia and Moravia 
would be incorporated within the Reich as a Protectorate, and whoever attempted to resist 
would be ‘trodden under foot' ( ztrtreUn ). Then the Fiihrer signed his name to the docu¬ 
ment and left the room. It was then about 12:30 a.m. 

"A tragic scene followed between the Czech Ministers and the three Germans. For 
many hours Dr. H&cha and M. Chvalkovsky protested against the outrage and refused to 
sign the document, stating that should they do so they would be eternally cursed by the 
Czech people. Dr. Hdcha opposed the statute with all his energy, remarking that such a 
condition of servitude had never before been imposed upon a white nation. 

“ The German Ministers were merciless in their insistence. They literally followed 
Dr. H&cha and M. Chvalkovsky around the table where the documents lay, thrusting them 



even during his conversation with Hitler German troops were already on 
the march into Czechoslovakia and had completed the occupation of the 
country. 14 

On March 16, 1939, 15 a decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor was pub¬ 
lished concerning the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, the preamble 
to which states that “ the Bohemian-Moravian countries belonged for a mil¬ 
lennium to the living space ( Lebensraum) of the German people,” and that 
there was danger that out of this area “would arise a new, stupendous men¬ 
ace to European peace.” Moreover, the Czechoslovak State was declared 
to have “demonstrated its inherent inability to exist and therefore now has 
fallen into actual dissolution.” Since “the German Reich cannot tolerate 
everlasting disturbances in these areas,” it was held to be “only an act of 
compliance with the law of self-preservation if the German Reich is resolved 
to take decisive action for the reestablishment of the foundations of a Central 
European Order.” Moreover, “the millennial historic past of the German 
Reich has proven that it alone is chosen by virtue of its greatness and the 
qualities of the German people to solve this problem.” By Article 3 of the 
decree the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was declared to be auton¬ 
omous, and it was described as possessing certain “sovereign rights.” These 
sovereign rights, however, must be exercised “in conformity with the politi¬ 
cal, military, and economic interests of the Reich.” 

The decree contains provisions to the effect that the Protectorate shall 
act through its own government and that it shall even have the right to 
accredit a minister to the Government of the Reich. But it is also pro¬ 
vided that the German Government shall appoint as guardian of its interests 
an official with residence in Prague, whose title is “Reich Protector of Bo¬ 
hemia and Moravia.” Thus the autonomous status in fact proves to be a 
mere illusion, since the Reich Protector has almost supreme power in the 

The Reich maintains police and military forces in the “autonomous” 
Protectorate and supervises directly such essential agencies as traffic, posts, 

before their eyes and placing pens in their hands, at the same time repeating that if the 
Czech Ministers refused to sign the documents, half of Prague would be laid waste by air¬ 
planes within two hours. Tht^German Ministers declared that hundreds of bombers were 
awaiting the command to take off, and unless the signatures were forthcoming by six 
o'clock in the morning, the order would be given. 

" President llacha was in such an exhausted condition that he frequently needed medical 
attention from physicians who had been in attendance since the beginning of the conference. 
On the statement of the Czech Ministers that such a decision could not be made without 
the consent of their government, they were informed that there already existed a direct 
telephone line to the Cabinet of Ministers then meeting in Prague and that the Cabinet 
could therefore be reached immediately. Such a line, it seems, had been laid in Czech 
territory by members of the German minority, unknown to Czech authorities. 

"At 4:30 in the morning, Dr. Hacha, who was in a state of total collapse and was kept 
on his feet only by means of medical stimulants, resigned himself to the inevitable and 
signed the document. M. Chvalkovsky declared on leaving the Chancellery: ‘Our people 
will curse us, and yet we have saved their existence and have preserved them from a horrible 
massacre."’ Documents Diplomatiques, I 938 ~i 939 » No. 77. 

14 Vdlkcrbund , March 23, 1939, No. 12, p. 151. w See below, p. 342. 



and telegraph. The members of the Czech autonomous government are 
subject to confirmation by the Reich Protector. 

It is stated in the decree of March 16, 1939, that the Reich may under¬ 
take any changes it deems necessary in the so-called autonomous Czech 
administration. In implementation of this provision the decree of the 
Fuhrer concerning administration in the Protectorate of Bohemia and 
Moravia of May 7, 1942, 10 delegated to the Reich Protector powers which 
enable him to make further limitations on the rights of the autonomous 
Czech administration. It is broadly stated in this decree that the Reich 
Protector is empowered “to undertake measures”—within the limits of the 
decree of March 16, 1939—“in order to make possible the adaptation of the 
administration of Bohemia and Moravia to any situation which may 
arise.” Thus practically the Reich Protector may limit the meager au¬ 
tonomy of the Protectorate as much as he deems it necessary to do so. 


In execution of the decree of March 16, 1939, two central authorities 
were established in Prague—the office of the Reich Protector (German) and 
the government of the Protectorate (Czech). 

The German Protector acts through nineteen German district prefects 
for the twelve districts in Bohemia and the seven districts in Moravia. 
These German prefects, each of whom has authority over one district, con¬ 
trol German administrative agencies and handle matters relating to general 
administration and citizenship, as well as other matters concerning Ger¬ 
mans living in their districts. The Czech autonomous administration carries 
out its functions through local Czech authorities. As a result of the parallel¬ 
ism thus created throughout the Protectorate, there are two types of author¬ 
ities, viz., German and Czech, but on every level of administration the 
German authorities control the Czech authorities. The office of the Reich 
Protector, for example, controls the government of the Czech “autono¬ 
mous” Protectorate, the German district governors control the Czech dis¬ 
trict administrative authorities, and the same situation exists in the cities 
and smaller communities. 


Citizens of German origin were granted citizenship of the German Reich, 
whereas the Czechs became citizens of the Protectorate. 17 In order to 
create for Germans an influential position in Czech political institutions as 
well, Germans were granted in addition all the rights deriving from Czech 
citizenship in the Protectorate, without any requirement that they should 
assume obligations pertaining to such citizenship. Moreover, Czech pa- 

w See below, p. 347* , ... , _ . . , . , . « . . . 

17 See order concerning the acquisition of German citizenship by former Czechoslovak 
citizens of German origin, of April 20, 1939, below, p. 346; also decree of March 16, 1939, 
below, p. 343. 



triots who were abroad were deprived of the citizenship of the Protectorate. 
The decree of the Reich Protector of October 3, 1939, stated that citizens of 
the Protectorate who were abroad and who had committed acts detrimental 
to the interests or reputation of the Reich or who did not comply with an 
order to return to the Protectorate would lose citizenship of the Protectorate 
and their property would be confiscated for the benefit of the Reich. 18 


The judicial system is based upon the principle of extraterritoriality for 
Germans. As a rule Germans may not be tried by Czech courts. Czechs, 
however, are subject not only to the criminal law of the Protectorate but also 
to the Criminal Code of the Reich in cases in which the political interests of 
Germany are involved, as, for example, cases involving treason, attacks 
against the Fiihrer, disrespect for German national emblems, and libel of the 
National Socialist Party or similar National Socialist organizations. 19 


The areas included in the Protectorate being highly industrialized, the 
Reich Protector was eager to take over the control of all industries. On 
June 23, 1939, a decree was published creating a framework for the totali¬ 
tarian reorganization of the economy of the Protectorate. 20 An order 
implementing this decree dated August 29, 1939, provided for the organiza¬ 
tion of the industries. 21 And finally an announcement by the Minister for 
Industry, of November 4, 1939, provided for the creation of twenty-three 
groups, which included all persons engaged in specific industries. The ac¬ 
quisition of raw materials by these groups, as well as the production and 
sale of their products, is controlled. The above-mentioned decree created 
the following industrial groups: (1) mining, (2) production of sugar, (3) pro¬ 
duction of alcohol, (4) production of beer, (5) malt industry, (6) flour mills, 
(7) food industry, (8) meat and poultry industry, (9) metal industry, (10) 
electrical works, (11) lumber mills, (12) lumber manufacturing, (13) paper 
and graphic industry, (14) chemical industry, (15) ceramics, (16) construc¬ 
tion industry, (17) glass industry, (18) textile industry, (19) clothing in¬ 
dustry, (20) leather industry, (21) film industry, (22) gas and water works, 
(23) manufacture of precious metals and precious stones. 


The most efficient instrumentality for subduing the Czechs to the will of 
the German ruler was provided by a decree which the government of the 

18 VerordnungsbUtU des Reich sprotektors in Boh men und Mdhren , No. 36, *939. 

19 See order of April 14, 1939, below, p. 347. 

*° Decree of January 23, 1939, concerning basic organization of economy. Sammlung 
der Gesetze und Verordnungen des Protektorats Bohmen und Mdhren, No. 61, 1939. 

tl Ibid., No. 78, 1939. 




Protectorate (Ildcha) was forced by the Reich Protector to promulgate. It 
was dated November 4, 1939, and entitled, “Government decree concerning 
temporary restrictions on trade and other gainful occupations.” 22 It is 
specifically stated in this decree that the authorities may deny permission 
to exercise a trade or occupation, even if all necessary requirements are met 
with. The right to grant or to deny permission is based upon vague and 
indefinite premises. It is stated that such permission will be granted by 
the authorities only when it appears that no objections arise against it, 
either from the point of view of the “extraordinary economic conditions or 
in general because of reasons of public interest. Practically, no Czech 
can make a living without being compelled to comply with the “ new order" 
imposed upon his country by the occupant. 


A great part of Czech property, as well as almost all Jewish property, was 
taken over by the Germans. The main instrumentalities for taking over 
such properties are the following: A decree of October 4, 1939, gave the 
Reich Protector the right to confiscate property of persons and associations 
which had promoted “tendencies inimical to law” (Rechtsfeindliche Bestrc- 
bungen). As political pressure on and persecutions of the Czechs and Jews 
increased, many of them endeavored to obtain permission to leave the 
country. Such permission was granted only when the applicant agreed to 
pay a high tax, amounting to a substantial part of his property, for the 
benefit of the Reich. 23 Such a tax is called “emigration tax,” amounting 
in practice to a profit taken by Germans on persecutions they organized 
against the inhabitants of the invaded country. Moreover, many of the 
Czechs, especially those possessing larger industrial undertakings, were 
compelled to sell their property to persons indicated by the Reich Pro¬ 


Czechoslovak citizens of German origin ( Volksdeutsche ) who before the 
invasion played the r&le of fifth columnists became the privileged element 
in the Protectorate. They were entitled not only to dual citizenship and 
to the right of extraterritoriality in courts (see above), but to a great many 
other privileges as well. First of all, they were granted rewards for their 
preinvasion activities in behalf of Germany, in the form of reparations for 
damages incurred by them when they were fighting the Government of the 
Czechoslovak Republic. In order to increase the number of Germans in 
the Protectorate, the German laws on subsidies for marriages and children 

» Sammlung tier Geselse und Verordnungen des Proleklorats Bohmen und Mdhren, No. 94. 

* ^See decree of November 23, 1939, concerning emigration tax. Sammlung der Geselzeund 
Verordnungen des Prolektorats Bohmen und Mdhren, No. 103, 1939 * 



were extended to German officials, members of the Gestapo and of the S.S., 
and to members of the Reichsarbeitsdienst. u 

The German language was introduced as a compulsory subject to be 
taught in the grammar schools. 26 

A great part of the food supplies from the Protectorate is shipped to 
Germany. Moreover, the Protectorate has become a vacation ground for 
Germans and men on leave from military service. All of them have looked 
to the Protectorate for better food and better beer. Therefore the Minister 
of Agriculture of the Protectorate issued a decree on January 15, 1941, to 
the effect that ration cards of Germans on leave or on vacations should be 
valid in the Protectorate. 26 


The status of the Jews in the Protectorate was established both by legis¬ 
lation of the Reich Protector and by the puppet Czech government. On 
June 2i f 1939, Jewish property was ordered registered. Jewish employees 
were eliminated from enterprises by decrees of October 23, 1939, and Sep¬ 
tember 14, 1940. On January 26, 1940, the Reich Protector issued a decree 
concerning the elimination of Jews from the economy of the Protectorate. 
Two orders, of January 26, 1940, 27 and February 7, 1940, implemented this 
elimination decree. Jews were, in fact, excluded from economic enter¬ 
prises of every kind. Even peddling was prohibited. A period of grace 
up to April 30, 1940, was given to those engaged in the. manufacture of 
textiles and shoes. Jews were forced to declare all of their gold, platinum, 
silver, and pearls. They were initially allowed to sell these valuables to a 
German company in Prague (Hadega—Handelsgesellschaft in Prague). 
On February 16, 1942, a decree was published concerning measures for the 
allocation of Jews in closed settlements. In implementation of this decree, 
thousands of Jews were concentrated in the prison fortress of Terezfn. 


Throughout all the Protectorate Czech nationhood is under persecution. 
Czech teachers may not refer to Czech national heroes, and may not give 
an interpretation along national lines. Revision of Czech textbooks has 
been required. Books by authors representing the national spirit, such 
as Masaryk, BeneS, and Karel tapek, as well as others, were prohibited. 
Books which emphasized national elements were initially burned. Later 
on the Germans changed this practice and made them into pulp to provide 

44 See decree of October 25, 1939, Verordnungsblatt des Reichsprotektors, No. 36, 1939. 

w See decree of October 5, 1939, Sammlung der Geselze und Verordnungen des Protektorats 
Boh men und Mdhren, No. 93, 1939. 

20 See Sammlung der Geselze und Verordnungen des Protektorats Bohmen und Mdhren, 
No. 8, 1941. 

47 Verordnungsblatt des Reichsprotektors , No. 7, 1940. 



material for papermaking. Also plays and operas were censored. Dvorak’s 
opera Jakobin , which was composed over fifty years ago was prohibited 
on the ground that it contains a tune starting with the words “Adolf, you 
are mad!” 28 The intellectuals, who are considered by the Germans as 
standard bearers of the Czech national spirit and consequently as dangerous 
elements to Germanism, are persecuted and kept in prisons and in labor 
battalions. Because of the patriotic feelings and activities of the students 
of Czech universities, all of those institutions were closed. The leaders of 
the students have been “liquidated” and thousands of others were sent into 
labor camps. The persecutions, however, seem only to stiffen the national 
resistance of the Czechs. Sabotage in the factories and in communications, 
the slaying of Gestapo members, and of Deputy Reich Protector Heydrich, 
are evidence of such increasing resistance. Even such wholesale retaliation 
as the complete destruction of a Czech town (Lidice) does not seem to stop 
the liberty-loving Czechs. 



As in Yugoslavia, the Germans took advantage of some difficult population 
problems within the Czechoslovak Republic in order to foster the dismem¬ 
berment and division of that country. For this purpose they directed their 
attention particularly to Slovakia, a nation of about two and a half million 
people. The Slovaks and Czechs are of the same ethnic group, but politi¬ 
cal differences arose between them during the period of the Czechoslovak 
Republic, the Slovaks claiming that they were not duly represented in the 
public affairs of the republic. At the time of the Munich crisis Hitler, 
through his agents, played upon these political differences. The majority 
of the Slovaks, however, and also such prominent statesmen as Monsignor 
Hlinka, seemed to prefer to remain within the framework of the Czecho¬ 
slovak Republic. Thus the Germans found followers only among the ex¬ 
tremists of the Slovak population. Meanwhile an autonomous status, with a 
special Slovak Diet, was granted to Slovakia by the government in Prague on 
November 19, 1938. 2 ® The Slovak Diet opened at Bratislava on January 20, 
1939, and Monsignor Tiso was appointed Premier by the President of the 
Republic. 30 

The Germans who swarmed over Slovakia worked against the consolida¬ 
tion of the good relations between the two federated countries. Espe¬ 
cially active in this field was the German leader Karmasin. On March 10, 
1939, the Prague government, being aware of the separatist activities in 

29 See Eugene V. Erdely, Germany's First European Protectorate (London: Robert Hale, 
Limited, 1942), p. 210. 

29 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XV, No. 24 (December 3, 1938), p. 1139. 

20 Ibid., Vol. XVI, No. 2 (January 28, 1939 ). P- 68. 




Slovakia, dismissed the Slovak Premier, Monsignor Tiso, and the next day 
appointed Sidor as the new Premier. 31 On March 13, Monsignor Tiso 
was summoned to Berlin by Hitler and was accompanied on his visit by 
Karmasin. On his arrival in Berlin the former was given the honors due a 
prime minister. At the same time a Vienna broadcasting station was used 
by members of the Slovak faction advocating the separation of Slovakia 
from Czechoslovakia. 32 On March 14 the Slovak Diet, which had func¬ 
tioned as the federal Diet of the Slovak part of the Czechoslovak Republic, 
after hearing Monsignor Tiso’s account of his visit to Hitler, voted for the 
creation of an independent State of Slovakia. 33 By the same vote the 
Slovak Diet was transformed into the legislative Diet of the State of Slo¬ 
vakia. The presiding committee of this Diet having been authorized to 
appoint a government, this was done on March 15, 1939* when a decree 
was issued establishing the following offices: President of the Government, 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Finance, 
Ministry of Schools and Public Education, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of 
Economy, Ministry of Transportation and Public Works, Ministry of 
National Defense. 34 

After the occupation of Bohemia and Moravia and the proclamation 
regarding a protectorate for those territories, the German Army occupied 
the western part of Slovakia, “the Valley of V&h, with its arms and muni¬ 
tions factories—Dubnica, PovaSskA Bystrica, Nov6 Mesto nad Vahom— 
hydro-electric plants at Pi'ichov and Ladce, and the most important rail¬ 
roads, linking the capital, Bratislava, with the rest of the country, and with 
Bohemia-Moravia.” 36 Thus Germany controlled the railway communica¬ 
tions between Bratislava and the eastern part of Slovakia, as well as the 
communications with Poland, Rumania, and Hungary. Afterward it sought 
to legalize this unlawful occupation by a treaty between it and Slovakia. 

On March 24, 1939, 85 a declaration was issued by the Reich Minister of 
Foreign Affairs, announcing that the German and Slovak governments had 
signed a treaty extending protection by the German Reich to the State of 
Slovakia. This treaty states that the Slovak State “has placed itself under 
the protection of the German Reich.” The German Reich undertook the 
protection of the political independence of the State of Slovakia and of the 
integrity of its territory. For the purpose of making effective the protection 
thus undertaken, Germany was given an area “delimited on its western side 
by the frontiers of the State of Slovakia, and on its eastern side by a line 
formed by the eastern rims of the Lower Carpathians, the White Carpathians 
and the Javornik Mountains.” In this area which had been, noia be?te, 

81 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XV, No. 6 (March 25, 1939). PP- 2 55 5^. 

« T\.:J - a.p r*r£, opfi S 3 p. 258. ** SCC D6lOW, p. 

** Ibid., pp. 235-36, 256, 257, 258. 

54 Eugene V. Erdely, Germany s First European 
Limited, 194 2 ). P- 53 - 
M See below, p. 353. 

353 . 

rotectorate (London: Robert Hale 



previously occupied by Germany according to a preconceived plan, the 
German Reich was to have the right to construct military installations and to 
keep them garrisoned by German troops in the strength which Germany 
deemed necessary. The Government of Slovakia obligated itself to provide 
the land for such military installations. Moreover, the Slovak Government 
agreed to grant exemptions from customs duties on imports from the Reich 
for the maintenance of the German troops and the supply of all military in¬ 
stallations. Article 4 of the same treaty states that “the Government of 
Slovakia will at all times conduct its foreign affairs in close agreement with 
the German Government.” The treaty was signed for a period of twenty- 
five years, and a final clause contains a provision for its extension “in due 


On July 21, 1939, the Slovak Diet voted a constitution. 37 This constitu¬ 
tion is preceded by a preamble based upon the principle of the solidarity of 
social classes. It states in particular that the Slovak State endeavors to co¬ 
ordinate all moral and economic forces of the nation in one Christian na¬ 
tional community and to avoid all conflicts between social classes. 

The Slovak State is a republic headed by an elected president. The 
legislative power in the republic is exercised by the Diet, consisting of eighty 
members directly elected for a term of five years through universal elec¬ 
tions in which equal suffrage and the secret ballot are prescribed. Every 
citizen twenty years of age has a right to vote, and every citizen thirty years 
of age has a right to be a candidate for election. Among the exclusive 
rights of the parliament are the election of the president, the drafting and 
enacting of the laws pertaining to the constitution and the establishing of the 
budget, the receiving of accounts of government expenditures, the establish¬ 
ment of courts, and the conclusion of treaties. The president is elected for 
seven years. He is the supreme representative of the state and supreme 
commander of the army. He appoints the members of the cabinet and 
higher officials and orders the promulgation of laws. The president is not 
responsible for the way in which he carries out his office. He may be 
indicted by the Council of State, but only for treason. The Council of State 
is composed as follows: The president of the republic appoints six members; 
the Slovak Hlinka (Popular) Party delegates ten members; every national 
group within Slovakia delegates one member; and each professional class 
within Slovakia also delegates one member. The president of the govern¬ 
ment and the president of the Diet are members ex officio of the Council. 
The Council of State has the following jurisdiction: it determines whether 
the president of the republic is permanently unable to fulfill his presidential 

37 Slovensky Zdkonnik , 1939, No. 41, p. 375. Fora German text of this constitution, see 
the Zcitschrijt fur Ausldndisches OffenUiches Kecht , Vol. IX, No. 3, 1939, p. 759. 



functions; it has the right to indict the president of the republic, as well as 
members of the government; it recommends candidates for election to the 
Diet; it introduces bills in the Diet and advises the president of the republic 
on political, cultural, and economic matters. The period of functioning by 
the Council of State is three years. 

In accordance with the Fascist pattern a corporate professional organiza¬ 
tion was introduced. Every citizen must belong to and may practice a 
profession only if he is a member of one of the following organized groups: 
(a) agriculture, ( b) industry, ( c ) trade and manufacture, ( d ) banking and in¬ 
surance business, ( e) free professions, (/) public servants, and ( g ) national 

As to the rights of citizens, they are only formally patterned according to 
democratic principles, for almost every civil right formulated in the constitu¬ 
tion is qualified by reservations. Thus, while Article 81 states that the in¬ 
habitants shall enjoy the protection of their lives, liberties, and property, 
without regard to their racial origin, religion, or profession, the same para¬ 
graph adds that limitations of these rights may be enacted by law. There¬ 
fore it was possible to promulgate the anti-Jewish Code, despite Article 81 
of the constitution. 38 

As to property, it must, according to the constitution, fulfill a social func¬ 
tion, and hence the owner is obliged to administer his property in the inter¬ 
est of the common weal. 

Slovak political life is organized along monoparty lines. The Hlinka 
(Popular) Party is the only one permitted to represent the Slovaks them¬ 
selves in political life. But other national groups, such as Hungarians and 
Germans, are entitled to their own political parties and to participation in 
the political life of the country. Thus, parties are established according to 
ethnographic, but not political, principles. 

Because of the presence in Slovakia of German and Hungarian minorities, 
the constitution provides for organization of racial minority groups. These 
groups have their own national registers and have the right to exercise their 
own cultural and political activities. They may also communicate with the 
states in which the main bulk of their national group is living. This provi¬ 
sion as to the maintenance of contacts outside the boundaries of Slovakia 
should be considered as a concession, imposed by Germany and Hungary. 


The new Slovak State has inherited from the Czechoslovak Republic a 
great body of basic laws pertaining to civil and criminal law and procedure, 
as well as administrative law. The new constitution and the totalitarian 

** It may be noted also that in the elections to the Diet held as early as December 18,1938, 
neither Czechs nor Jews were permitted to nominate their candidates, and the Jews were 
required to place their ballot papers in a separate urn. Bulletin of International News, 
Vol. XV, No. 26 (December 31, 1938), p. 1243. 



trends in the new state required an adaptation of the law to the totalitarian 
pattern, especially to the Nazi pattern. I'll us a law on concentration camps 
was promulgated as early as March 24, 1939. The reasons for confinement 
in a concentration camp are defined in a very broad way, and thus a great 
discretionary power is given to the administrative authorities in fighting 
political adversaries. It is stated that “ the Minister of the Interior shall be 
authorized to order protective custody for persons who by their activities up 
to .the present time have warranted and still warrant reasonable fear that 
they will be an obstacle to the upbuilding of the State of Slovakia. 39 

The organization of the courts remained much the same as in the time of 
the Czechoslovak Republic, except for the introduction of special courts to 
punish political crimes. The creation of the state necessitated also the es¬ 
tablishment of a Supreme Court in Bratislava, 10 and of a Supreme Adminis¬ 
trative Court. This latter court decides “all cases in which a party alleges 
that its right has been violated by an illegal decision or order issued by an 
administrative authority.” 41 


As has been indicated, in accordance with the German pattern anti-Jewish 
legislation was introduced, involving deprivation of citizenship, confiscation 
of property, prohibition of the exercise of professions, forced labor, and de¬ 
portations. From Slovakia, 130,000 Czechs were removed to Bohemia and 
Moravia; 60,000 Jews to Eastern Galicia in the Government General of 
Poland; and 10,000 Jews to Hungary. 42 The new state considered its anti- 
Jewish policy to be of such importance that all anti-Jewish measures were 
codified in one Jewish Code consisting of as many as 270 articles. 


On April 4, 1939, 13 a decree was published establishing a Slovak National 
Bank. This bank was authorized to issue bank notes for the State of 
Slovakia. The new currency unit was established as a Slovak crown, 
divided into 100 haliers. For purposes of exchange the Slovak crown was 
made equal to the Czech crown. A special provision required that the total 
amount of small coins issued must not be higher than 200 crowns per capita 
of population. 44 


As in other parts of occupied or Axis-dominated Europe property plays 
a dual r 61 e: first, that of affording economic resources to the state; and 
second, that of serving as an instrumentality of political pressure. A decree 
was introduced on March 30, 1939, 46 to the effect that “the County Court 

» See below, p. 355. 40 See decree of April 4. 1939 . below, p. 356. 

“ See law of May 7, 1940, below, p. 35b. 42 Kulischer, op. 114. 

w See below, p. ^57. 44 See decree of April 4, 1939 . below, p. 358. See below, p. 359 - 



shall establish a temporary control of those estates over thirty hectares in 
extent where farming is for any reason jeopardized.” The mayor and the 
secretary of each community arc directed “to watch the farming in their 
districts” and report the state of farming to the county administration. If 
the farming situation is unsatisfactory, the court "shall, on motion of the 
county administration or the Minister of Economy, place the estate in the 
hands of a trustee,” who shall take over the farming. This decree gives 
prima facie the impression of a tendency on the part of the government to 
intensify agricultural production; but on the other hand it confers on the 
administration the right to take over properties of people who are not in 
sympathy with the new political regime. 

Of a definitely political nature is the decree of April 24, 1939. « This de¬ 
cree states that the property of persons “which was obtained through their 
own political' activities, through political influence, or through the political 
activities or influence of other persons or political parties during the period 
from October 30, 1918, to October 6, 1938, shall be forfeited to the inde¬ 
pendent State of Slovakia regardless of whether the property is situated in 
this country or abroad.” This decree is evidence of the intent of the present 
government to seize the property of the Slovak statesmen who collaborated 
with the Prague government during the period in which the Slovaks consid¬ 
ered that they had suffered from the political predominance of the Czechs. 

The Highland Territories and Subcarpathia 
(Incorporated into Hungary) 

Hungary has occupied and incorporated, from among territories which it 
had lost to Czechoslovakia by virtue of the Trianon Treaty of 1921, two 
provinces, one with a Hungarian majority of population, the so-called High¬ 
land Territories; and the other, with a Ruthenian majority of population, 
Subcarpathia. Because of the fact that these territories represent a different 
historic and ethnographic picture and also because they were occupied and 
incorporated at different times, they are treated separately below. The 
claim to these territories by Hungary being based on a specific Hungarian 
institution called the “doctrine of the Holy Crown,” the author has deemed 
it necessary to devote a section to this problem. 

7 he Doctrine of the Holy Crown 

The doctrine of the Holy Crown is a very essential element of Hungarian 
history vitally affecting the political life of Hungary. Even before the 
present war, this doctrine had been especially expressed in the agitation for 

49 See below, p. 360. 



the acquisition of formerly owned territories and their incorporation into 
the Hungarian Holy Crown. 

The doctrine may be said to date from the coronation of St. Stephen as 
King of Hungary on Christmas day in the year 1000, 47 by Pope Sylvester II, 
who previously, in a letter of March 27, had announced that he took the 
people of Hungary under the protection of the Church. 48 

In the succeeding centuries the Crown, consecrated by the Church, has 
symbolized kingship and royal prerogatives. But at an early date it also 
assumed further attributes, with the result that throughout the long period 
of Hungarian history reference is made to the Holy Crown as a legal entity, 
possessing dignity, glory, property, and benefits, but also subject to injuries 
and grievances. It acquired a transcendental character because of its reli¬ 
gious origin and because of the fact that it had been “worn by the saintly 
king who founded the Hungarian State. ” 49 

Later on, the “Holy Crown” became the first sign of the evolution of a 
state personality independent of the king’s person. For example, the small 
towns of Dalmatia appealed for protection, not to the king but to the 
Crown of Hungary, and in the period of the fifteenth century when Hun¬ 
gary was without a king, the Hungarian magnates declared that the Holy 
Crown alone could exercise the powers of the state. After the Estates were 
developed, the election of the king and his coronation ceased to be a Church 
function and became a prerogative of the Estates, the person of the king 
fading more and more into the background and the Holy Crown becoming 
the symbol of the whole territory of the Hungarian Kingdom, while the 
subjects of the kingdom were called subjects of the Crown. As stated by 
the great Hungarian historian Verboczi, every noble was a member of the 
“Holy Crown.” “The criterion of citizenship was also whether the person 
in question belonged to the Holy Crown.” 60 

As the Holy Crown came to be considered the legal owner of the territory, 
it was therefore regarded as entitled to claim territories lost by it to other 
countries. When such lands were lost, it was the “Holy Grown,” not 
Hungary, which figured in speeches of members of Parliament regarding 
the lost territory. After the creation of the dual monarchy of Austria- 
Hungary, “the defective character of the country’s sovereignty was felt,” 61 
and the doctrine of the Holy Crown was used as an argument against en¬ 
croachments by the monarchy upon the rights of the Hungarian Parlia¬ 

47 See Dominic G. Kosary, A History of Hungary (Cleveland and New York: The Benja¬ 
min Franklin Bibliophile Society, 1941), p. 21. 

48 See William E. Lingelbach, Austria Hungary, in the series “The History of Nations,” 
Henry Cabot Lodge, Editor-in-Chief (New York: P. F. Collier & Son Company [1928]), 
Vol. XVII, p. 47 - 

4i Gyula Szekfu, “The Doctrine of the Holy Crown,” Danubian Review (Budapest and 
London), Vol. IX, No. 2 (July, 1941), p. 3. 

60 Ibid., pp. 3-6. SI Ibid., p. 6. 



Following the Treaty of Trianon, the doctrine of the Holy Crown was 
again invoked in treaty revision activities which were subsequently carried 
on. The Hungarians claimed, in the name of the Holy Crown, the resto¬ 
ration of all territories which had belonged to the Crown in the past. In 
particular they claimed territories lost to Czechoslovakia under the Treaty 
of Trianon, namely, Subcarpathia and the so-called Highland Territories, 
situated in the highlands along the northern borders of Hungary, which 
are the southern borders of Czechoslovakia. They claimed also territories 
lost to Yugoslavia and to Rumania (Transylvania). Because of the per¬ 
sistence of the doctrine of the Holy Crown in Hungarian history, the laws 
on reincorporation of these territories, as cited below, refer always to the 
return of these territories to the “Hungarian Holy Crown.” 62 

The Highland Territories 

During the Munich crisis Hungary renewed its claims to the territories 
situated in Czechoslovakia to the north of the mountainous Hungaro- 
Czechoslovak frontiers. As Germany and Italy took over at that time the 
factual control of Central Europe, they decided to settle by arbitration this 
claim of Hungary against Czechoslovakia, and accordingly the Foreign 
Ministers of Germany and Italy met in Vienna and issued the so-called 
Vienna Award of November 2, 1938, 63 under which a number of districts were 
allotted to Hungary (see above). 

These regions, referred to as the “Highland Territories,” 54 were incor¬ 
porated into Hungary by the law of November 12, 1938, enacted by the 
Hungarian Royal Parliament. In this law the doctrine of the Holy Crown 
found its full expression in the solemn words: “The Hungarian Parliament 
devoutly expresses its gratitude to Divine Providence that after twenty 
years’ separation, trial, and heroic resistance against foreign rule, one part 
of the torn-away Highland Territories returns to the realm of the Hungarian 
Holy Crown. The Hungarian fatherland greets with the deepest joy, and 
clasps to its heart with the affection of a loving mother, these returning 
children who have suffered so much.” 65 By the incorporation of the High¬ 
land Territories Hungary acquired a territory of 11,927 square kilometres 
(4,605 square miles) and a population of 1,044,438. Of these inhabitants, 

63 See, as to the Highland Territories: Law XXXIV of November 12, 1938; decree of 
December 18, 1938, No. 933%938; and Law V of June 22, 1939, below, pp. 361, 366, 370. 
As to Subcarpathia, see Law VI of June 22, 1939, below, p. 363. 

* 3 See Documents on International Affairs , 1938, Monica Curtis, ed. (London, etc.: Oxford 
University Press), Vol. II (1943), p. 351. 

64 The Hungarians used to refer to all of Slovakia and Carpathian Ruthenia as Felvidek 
(Highland Territories). After November, 1938, this designation applied in Hungary to 
that part of Slovakia annexed to Hungary by the Vienna arbitration. 

66 See Law XXXIV of 1938, below, p. 361. 



the main groups consisted of the following: 587,692 Hungarians, 5 1 >57^ J ews - 
288,803 Slovaks, and 35,261 Subcarpathian Ruthenians (figures of the 1930 


The Parliament of Hungary consists of two houses, the Upper House and 
the Lower House. Under the provisions of Law XXII promulgated No¬ 
vember 15, 1926, 56 membership in the Upper House is based on (1) dignity 
of office, (2) election, and (3) nomination, and consists of the following 
groups: high dignitaries, such as judges and high state officials; clerical 
dignitaries of the various confessions; elected representatives of former 
hereditary members of the House of Magnates; members elected by the 
county and municipal authorities; members elected by organizations and 
representative bodies of agriculture, industry, commerce, science, arts and 
other professions; male members of the former reigning dynasty who have 
completed their twenty-fourth year and are residing permanently in the 
country; and members appointed by the head of the state. The Lower 
House consists mainly of representatives of rural constituencies elected by 

After the incorporation of the Highlands, the Hungarian Government was 
eager to introduce into the Parliament representatives of the incorporated 
territories as a means of signalizing the return of these territories to Hungary. 
There was a prevailing tendency however to have only persons acceptable 
to'the Budapest Government join the Parliament. Therefore Law XXXIV 
of 1938 57 provided that the Hungarian Parliament, on the motion of the 
Prime Minister, and with both houses consenting, should nominate those 
who, “from among those persons elected by the population of the Highland 
Territories as senators and national or provincial representatives," were to 
become members of the Hungarian Parliament. Law V of 1939 68 contained 
a similar provision, to be in effect “until such time as it may be possible 
to hold parliamentary elections” in the reincorporated territories. It 
further stipulated that elections should take place before June 30, 1940. 
Another law was enacted in 1942 (Law XXI), 5 * which listed the number 
of members eligible to the Upper House from all the counties of Hungary. 

The denial to the rcincorporated territories of the right of free elections 
after reincorporation is evidence of the fact that the Hungarian Government 
was not sure of the attitude and feelings of the population, although the 
incorporation law referred to this population as faithful returning sons. 


A special ministry without portfolio was instituted in Budapest for the 
administration and supervision of the Highland Territories. Since the Hun¬ 
s' British and Foreign State Papers, Vol. 123, p. 903. 67 See below, p. 361. 

68 See below, p. 366. “ See below, p. 367. 



garians regarded the incorporated areas as returning to them, and since the 
loss of these territories had been considered by the Hungarians as a national 
disaster, they were anxious to introduce as soon as possible in the reacquired 
territories the type of administration which existed in them before the 
Trianon Treaty. Not only was the Hungarian type of administrative 
agency introduced but also the Hungarian geographical divisions of the 
counties. The boundary lines of the old counties before their acquisition by 
Czechoslovakia were thus restored. 

The county or comitatus is an essential element of Hungarian administra¬ 
tion in the middle bracket, based upon a long historical evolution. All the 
country is divided into counties and, for the larger cities, town-counties. 
The administration of the counties is carried on by a County Chief ( Foispan ), 
appointed by the government. The County Chief is assisted by a represen¬ 
tative body, half of which consists of elected members and half of citizens 
who pay the highest taxes. By the decree of the Hungarian Royal Prime 
Minister of December 18, 1938, 60 the organization of the Hungarian comita¬ 
tus was reintroduced into the Highland Territories with certain essential 
changes limiting the elective form of government. This decree stated that 
the County Chief should appoint members of the representative assemblies 
of the comitatus from among thetnembers of the representative assemblies of 
the former Czechoslovak counties. Special provisions were made for mem¬ 
bers of representative bodies in the town-counties. Thus, the members of 
the assembly of the autonomous city of Kassa (KoSice) were to be appointed 
in the number of fifty-six by the Minister of the Interior, in agreement with 
the Minister without portfolio for Highland Affairs. In the cities of Ungvfir 
and Munk&cs (which are a part of Subcarpathia), the members of the repre¬ 
sentative assemblies were to be appointed by the mayors. In the surround¬ 
ing communities the members of the assemblies were to be appointed by the 

As no elections to Parliament were to take place for the time being, the 
representative assemblies of the counties could not function as electors of 
members of Parliament. The above-mentioned law expressly suspended 
this function of the county assemblies. 

The officials necessary for the functioning of the representative assemblies, 
the decree states, were to be appointed by the Minister of the Interior, in 
agreement with the Minister without portfolio for Highland Affairs, and pos¬ 
sibly other ministers interested. In certain counties (Esztergom, N6gr&d, 
Abauj-Torna and Zempl6n) special advisers to the county chiefs were to be ap¬ 
pointed by the Minister of the Interior, in agreement with the Minister with¬ 
out portfolio for Highland Affairs. These advisers were to assist the county 
chief in supplying information relative to the affairs of the Highland Territo¬ 
ries, and in reaching decisions upon all matters relating to these territories. 

80 See below, p. 370. 


Czech officials were dismissed and replaced by Hungarian officials. Since 
there were not sufficient numbers of Hungarian candidates for these posts, 
the civil service requirements for appointive officials in the incorporated 
Highland Territories were lowered by decree No. 933 °/ x 93 8 of December 
18, 1938. • Such lowering of the civil service requirements imposes a hardship 
on the population, particularly in times of political change and tension, 
when the culture and skill of government officials are of great importance. 

It is true that the Minister of the Interior instructed the Hungarian 
authorities, in a decree of March 13, 1939 (which established definitively the 
Hungarian-Czechoslovakian frontier in the area between the Danube and 
die Ung), to refrain from any measures in connection with “acts caused by 
the present political tension until the day of the actual return of the terri¬ 
tories.” 61 Discrimination in the treatment of the population was, however, 
introduced by order of the Minister of the Interior of January 24, 1939, to 
the effect that only persons who prove their Hungarian citizenship may 
engage in certain trades and occupations. 62 The local Czech and Jewish 
population were principally affected by this order. Moreover, the legal 
status of the Jews in the incorporated Highland Territories was adjusted to 
the anti-Jewish laws which had been in force in all Hungary. 63 

annulment of agrarian reforms 

Before the present war the Hungarians claimed in many instances that the 
Czechoslovak agrarian reforms were directed mainly toward the liquidation 
of land ownership by Hungarians, the Hungarian landowners representing 
the focus of political influence in the given area. Consequently, under the 
reincorporation a decree was promulgated 64 by the Hungarian Royal Cabinet 
to the effect that all transfers of real property which took place in the High¬ 
land Territories under Czechoslovak regulations dealing with agrarian re¬ 
form should be investigated and might be declared null and void. Excep¬ 
tions were to be made only in the case of acquisitions by municipalities, the 
Church, or former seigniorial landowners, or by associations and institutions 
of agricultural training. The ownership of the landed estates the acquisition 

« Below, p. 363. es Belugyi Kdzlony, February 5, 1939. Order No. 45700. 

63 The main laws of this type are the following: the law of May, 1938, which provided 
for a gradual reduction over a course of five years of the percentage of Jews in commerce 
and industry; the complicated law of May 4, 1939, which concerned converts and exemp¬ 
tions of certain categories of Jews from anti-Jewish laws and established deadlines for the 
elimination of Jewish employees; a decree of the Minister of Education of January, 1940, 
dismissing all Jewish teachers; a decree of the Minister of Commerce of November 16, 
1940, to the effect that only those Jewish tavern- and inn-keepers who employed Gentile 
help would be permitted to keep their licenses until the final date provided py law; law of 
October, 1940, which deprived Jews from Transylvania of representation in the Upper 
House of the Parliament; decree of May 15, 1941, w'hich provided that if a Jewish em¬ 
ployee was called into military service his civilian position was to be filled by a Gentile; 
decree of August, 1941, prohibiting marriages between Gentiles and Jews under penalty of 
five years’ imprisonment for both parties. For details, see Hitler's Ten-Year Irar on the 
Jews , pp. 68-77. 

64 See decree of March 12, 1939, below, p. 372. 



of which has been voided is, from the time of such voiding, vested in the 
Hungarian State free of every incumbrance and with the land servitudes 
intact. As to the voided transactions, the former owner has a right to reim¬ 
bursement for the amounts which he or his legal predecessor paid to the 
Czechoslovak Ministry of Agriculture or to the previous owner. Compensa¬ 
tion is paid for improvements in landed estates only in exceptional cases. The 
execution of this decree was entrusted to a special commissioner appointed by 
the Ministry. The decisions of this commissioner as to voiding and com¬ 
pensation are to be final. The commissioner functions under the supervision 
of the Minister of Agriculture, with headquarters in Budapest. In this con¬ 
nection it should be stated that, aside from racial considerations (Czechs 
versus Hungarians, and vice versa), the Czechoslovak reform was a work of 
democratization of landed property. The annulment of this reform and the 
cancellation of the measures taken thereunder signify a return to a socially 
more backward system of land ownership in the incorporated territories. 


By a decree of the Council of Ministers, Hungarian currency became legal 
tender in the Highland Territories as of November 19, 1938. Currency in 
denominations of 20, 50 and 100 Czechoslovak crowns was exchanged at the 
rate of 100 pengb to 700 Czechoslovak crowns, and 100 crowns to 14.28 
pengo. Claims owned by the Czechoslovak National Bank were taken over 
by the Hungarian National Bank under the decree of the Council of Minis¬ 
ters of November 27, 1938. 65 



Subcarpathia, a country inhabited in large majority by Ruthenians and 
only in the minority by Hungarians, was also claimed by Hungary on the 
ground that it had once belonged to the Hungarian Holy Crown. At the 
time of the occupation of the remaining parts of Czechoslovakia, Subcar¬ 
pathia or Carpatho-Ukraine, as it was also called, which was then a federa¬ 
tive unit within Czechoslovakia, decided through its National Council that 
this province should declare its independence. The following resolution was 
passed by the Council: “We stand for an ethnographic settlement of the 
frontiers between Hungary and Ruthenia. We decisively reject any form of 
plebiscite, as the political allegiance of Ruthenia has already been definitely 
settled. We are in favour of the federal form of the State of the Czechs, 
Slovaks, and Ukrainians (Ruthenians).” 66 A new cabinet was formed with 

66 Order No. 7,210/1938, Bclugyi Kozl&ny ,, November 27, 1938, pp. 1152-53. 

66 Resolution of the Ukrainian National Council, quoted by Monsignor Volosfn, Minister 
for the Administration of Ruthenia, October 26, 1938. See Documents on International 
Affairs , 1938, sup . cit ., Vol. II, p. 349. 


Father Volo§in as Prime Minister, but in the meantime, on March 14, 1939, 
Hungarian troops had crossed the border and had begun the occupation of 
Subcarpathia. 67 VoloSCn telegraphed to Berlin for assistance, and when his 
appeal failed he and his ministers fled to Rumania. 68 

On the same day that Hungarian troops were marching into the territory, 
the Hungarian Government sent an ultimatum to Prague demanding the 
withdrawal of all Czech troops within twelve hours. The Czech Govern¬ 
ment complied partially with this ultimatum, and later on Hungary occupied 
all Subcarpathia. 

Subcarpathia was incorporated into Hungary by Law VI of 1939 enacted 
by the Hungarian Parliament on June 22 of that year, in which law the doc¬ 
trine of the Holy Crown again found expression. In this law of incorporation 
Parliament welcomes the returned territory and its inhabitants in the fol¬ 
lowing words: 

The Hungarian Parliament devoutly expresses its gratitude to Divine Providence 
that, after the return in the last quarter of the year 1938 of a part of the tom-away 
Highland Territories, Carpathia also returned to the realm of the Hungarian Holy 
Crown in the month of March of the year 1939 * ^he Hungarian fatherland greets 
with the deepest joy, and with the affection of a loving mother clasps to its heart, its 
faithful sons who have suffered so much and who have returned together with the terri¬ 
tory of the northeastern Carpathians, delimited by their 1 ,ooo-year-old boundaries. 69 

By the incorporation of Subcarpathia Hungary acquired a territory of 
12,146 square kilometres (4,690 square miles) and a population of 671,962 
persons. From Subcarpathia, 20,000 to 30,000 Czechs and Slovaks were 
moved to Bohemia and Moravia and Slovakia. 70 


Law VI of 1939 provided that elections should take place before June 30, 
1940. In the meantime, in accordance with the provisions of this law, the 
Prime Minister was to propose as members of Parliament not more than 
ten persons “from among those elected by the population of the Carpathian 
territories as senators and national or provincial representatives, or candi¬ 
dates listed on the register of the Hungarian parties as elected substitute 
representatives, or members of the national council elected by the original 
population of Subcarpathia.” These names were to be subject to the ap¬ 
proval of both houses of Parliament. Subsequently, Law XXI of I 94 2 
indicated the number of representatives eligible to the Parliament from Sub- 

67 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVI, No. 6 (March 25, 1939), p. 259. 

88 Some authors do not treat seriously the endeavors toward independence of bubcar- 
pathia. Michael Winch describes with distrust these endeavors of “half a million back¬ 
ward mountain shepherds and lumbermen w ho cared only about the price of timber and the 
possibility of earning a few- shillings.” See Republic for a Day: .In Eye- Witness Account of 
the Car patho-Ukraine Incident (London: Robt. Hale & Co., Ltd., I 939 )» 

80 See Law VI of 1939, below, p. 363. 70 Kulischer, op. ctt., p. 114. 



carpathia, and, in addition, Section 8 of the same law provided that three 
members of the Upper House should be appointed from Subcarpathia, 
beginning January i, 1943. 71 


Law VI of 1939 authorized the Prime Minister to introduce in the Parlia¬ 
ment a bill providing for the autonomy of Carpathia. However, the same 
law provided in Section 7, that the Cabinet "is authorized ... to issue 
such orders in regard to the Carpathian Territories as may be necessary in 
order to adjust the administration, legislation, economy and generally the 
whole legal system, to the legal structure of the country or to harmonize the 
two.” The Cabinet was authorized to issue these orders even though 
they dealt with matters falling normally within the jurisdiction of the 
Parliament. They were required subsequently to be confirmed by Parlia¬ 
ment. thus, the idea of autonomy, although proclaimed, w r as from the 
beginning very greatly restricted by the provisions concerning assimilation 
of administration and law' with the governmental regime of Hungary. The 
administration of Subcarpathia was originally in the hands of the Hungarian 
military authorities but this system was soon changed to administration 
by civil authorities. The Hungarian Government appointed a commis¬ 
sioner for Subcarpathia, with the title “Commissioner of the Regent,” 
who is assisted by an adviser. 

The promised autonomy is limited to local administrative matters, 
while in the political and cultural fields the government, endeavors to impose 
the llungaiian pattern upon the population. Education, especially in 
secondary schools, follows the Hungarian system. The land which had been 
disli ibuted among the peasants by the Czechoslovak law on agrarian reform 
has been reallocated to Hungarian landowners from whom it was taken. 
Moreover, landed properties have been taken from Jews and distributed 
among Hungarians repatriated from Rumania. The Ruthenian youth is 
pressed into the Levente organization (a kind of Hungarian fascist youth 
organization). A pro-Hungarian local politician by the name of Kurtyak 7 - 
is collaborating with the Hungarian authorities, while other Ruthenian 
leaders have left the country or are hiding to escape persecution. 

The Hungarians instituted a severe church policy, usually directed against 
the union of free churches, which had a considerable number of adherents 
and which were regarded as centers of Anglophile influence. The union was 
dissolved and church property confiscated. 73 

1 he Subcarpathian deputies to the Parliament, in the number of seven, have formed a 
special group in the I arhament called the “Group of Subcarpathian Deputies." 

1 f Fights Back. A Document oftke Czechoslovak Ministry of Foreign A fairs. 

Introduction by Jan Masaryk (Washington: American Council on Public Affairs, 1943), 

‘‘Subcarpathian Russia—a Forgotten Country," Central European 
Observer, Vol. XVIII, No. 19 (September 19, 1941), p. 263. r 




Hungarian citizenship was granted ipso jure 74 to inhabitants of the Sub- 
carpathian territory who had lived continuously for ten years (from March 
15, 1929, to March 15, 1939) in this territory, and who were Hungarian citi¬ 
zens on July 26, 1921 (day of the exchange of ratifications of the Trianon 
Treaty). Hungarian citizenship granted under these rules was extended to 
wives and to children under twenty-four years of age. A child born out of 
wedlock, if not over twenty-four, follows the citizenship of its mother. A 
full orphan or a fatherless orphan born after July 26, 1921, as a ( zechoslovak 
citizen acquired Hungarian citizenship if the father was a Hungarian citizen 
on that date, or the grandfather, if the father was born later. 1 he essential 
condition is, however, that the orphan himself shall have lived for ten years 
continuously from March 15* I 9 2 9 — or since his birth (if born later) in the 
territory of Subcarpathia. 

The law provided further that any person whose ancestor acquired Czecho¬ 
slovak citizenship by option on the basis of Article 64 of the Treaty of I ri- 
anon should not be entitled to Hungarian citizenship. 


By decree No. 3,670/1939 of April 23, 1939 . 75 Hungarian currency was 
made legal tender in Subcarpathia. The exchange rate was established 
as follows: 100 pengo equals 700 Czech crowns; 100 crowns equals 14.28 

74 Law VI of June 22, 1939, below, p. 364. 

75 BelUgyi Kozlony, April 23, 1939, No. 18, p. 476. 




The port of Danzig, founded by the Poles, was for centuries a goal in the 
German Drang nach Os ten . In 1308 it was conquered from Poland by the 
Teutonic Knights, who carried out a mass slaughter of the Polish popula¬ 
tion. 1 When Pope Clement V, in his Bull dated at Avignon June 19, 1310, 
denounced the massacre of more than 10,000 people in the city of Gdafisk 
(Polish name for Danzig), the procurators of the Teutonic order alleged that 
“the mentioned citizens destroyed the houses of the town of their own free 
will and went to live in other parts.” 2 

About the middle of the fifteenth century, a Prussian League, formed at 
that time, which included Danzig, appealed to the ancient Polish sovereign 
against the Teutonic Order of Knights. After a twelve-year war Danzig was 
restored to the Polish Crown. The city received from the Polish king full 
self-government and entered on a period of great economic prosperity because 
it served as the only port for all the exports from Poland. The subsequent 
partitions of Poland have destroyed Polish sovereignty over Danzig. After 
the Peace Conference of 1919 the economic interdependence of Poland and 
Danzig was recognized. 3 

The Conference initially intended to incorporate Danzig into Poland, but 
finally decision was reached to create from Danzig (with an area of nearly 
eight hundred square miles and a population of 400,000) a Free City under 
the protection of the League of Nations and with special rights for Poland. 
The provisions for the establishment of the Free City are contained in Arti¬ 
cles 100 to 108 of the Treaty of Versailles, and these provisions were further 

1 “ No person of Polish nationality was spared, whatever his condition, sex or age might be, 
but they put to death without mercy individuals of age and under age, including children and 
infants at the breast, so that the news of this cruelty should spread and break the nerve of 
others who would fear to offer resistance in other towns and fortified places, and thereby 
render secure their occupation of the said land. Seldom was the spilling of Polish blood at¬ 
tending the conquest of any place more profuse, seldom the slaughter more inhuman.” 
Dlugosii Joannis canonici Cracovicnsis Hisloriac Polonicae , libri XII, Cracoviae, 1876, III, 
p. 44 s. 

* Liles ac res gestae inter Polotios Ordimmque Crucifer or urn I, Posnaniae, 1890, pp. 423, 428. 

8 The importance of Danzig for Poland was recognized in past centuries by German lead¬ 
ers as well. Frederick the Great once said: 44 Whosoever possesses the mouth of the Vistula 
and the city of Danzig will be more master of Poland than the King who reigns there.” 
Quoted from Casimir Sinogorzewski, Poland's Access to the Sea (London: Allen & Unwin, 
Limited, 1934), p. 229. 

When Bismarck was out of the government, he headed in Germany an anti-Polish move¬ 
ment. In 1893 he declared to a delegation of followers: 44 For a Polish State with Warsaw, 
Danzig is a greater necessity than Poznan.” Bismarck: Die gesammelten Werke, Vol. XIII, 
ed. by W. Schiissler (Berlin, 1930), p. 544. 

See also Poland and Danzig, edited by the Polish Research Centre (London: The Cornwall 
Press, Ltd., 1941). 




implemented by two conventions between Poland and the Free City of Dan¬ 
zig which were signed, one in Paris on November 9, 1920, the other in War¬ 
saw on October 24, 1921. 4 The mutual rights of Danzig and Poland as 
formulated in the above-mentioned documents were in the main as follows: 
The Free City of Danzig was included within the Polish customs frontiers 
and a free area was established in the port. Poland received the free use and 
service of the whole railway system, the waterways, docks, basins, wharves, 
and other works within the territory of the Free City necessary for Polish 
imports and exports. The railways and docks of the port were to be admin¬ 
istered by a commission of Poles and Danzigers, with a neutral chairman. 
Poland received also the control and administration of postal, telegraphic, 
and telephonic communication between Poland and the port of Danzig. 
The Polish Government was granted the right to conduct the foreign affairs 
of the Free City of Danzig and was entrusted with the diplomatic protection 
of the citizens of that city when abroad. No discrimination could be under¬ 
taken within the Free City of Danzig to the detriment of Polish citizens. 

A constitution was drawn up for the Free City of Danzig, providing for a 
popular Assembly (Volkstag) as a parliament, and for an executive body 
called the Senate, which was elected for a period of four years by the Volks¬ 
tag. Danzig had its own currency (gulden), and its own courts. The offi¬ 
cial language was German. 

The League of Nations was represented in Danzig by a High Commis¬ 
sioner, whose main task was to coordinate and maintain good relations be¬ 
tween the Free City and Poland. For the safeguarding of Polish interests, 
the office of a Polish Commissioner v was established in Danzig. 


On April 28, 1939, Hitler declared in a speech before the Reichstag that 
Danzig must return to German sovereignty. After four months of great 
political tension, Germany launched an attack on Poland on September 1, 
1939, and occupied Danzig. 

On the same day, the Gauleiter of the Nazi Party in Danzig, Forster, 
signed a statute abolishing the Constitution of the Free City of Danzig and 
declaring the city, with its territory and its citizens, incorporated into the 
German Reich. All legislative and executive power was vested exclusively 
in the Head of the City. On the same day an act was passed by the Reichs¬ 
tag embodying the Danzig statute and making it an “Act of the Reich.’* 
Under this statute of the Reichstag, citizens of the Free City of Danzig were 
to become “German citizens in accordance with provisions to be issued,” and 
provision was made for “the entire body of Reich law and Prussian law” to 
“take effect as of January 1, 1940.” The Reich Minister of the Interior 

4 Ian F. D. Morrow, “The International Status of the Free City of Danzig,** British Year 
Book of 1 titer national Law , Vol. XVIII (1937), pp. 114, 118, 120. 




was entrusted with all matters connected with the incorporation of Danzig 
into the German Reich. 6 

Later, on October 8, 1939, Danzig was incorporated into the District 
( Gau ) of Western Prussia and served as headquarters for the Reich Governor. 
Poles living in Danzig, even if they were formerly citizens of the Free City, 
were treated just as were the Poles in the incorporated parts of western 
Poland. They were excluded from German citizenship and their property 
was sequestrated in Danzig in the same way as in the Polish Incorporated 
Territories. 6 

The German Reichsmark was made exclusive legal tender and the local 
Danzig gulden were exchanged into Reichsmarks at the rate of 1 Reichsmark 
to 1.43 Danzig gulden. 

6 See below, p. 375. 

6 See decree of September 17, 1940, below, p. 511. 





I. Invasion 

Without warning and in violation of the non-aggression pact between Ger¬ 
many and Denmark signed less than a year before, 1 and on which the Gov¬ 
ernment of Denmark strongly relied, 2 German troops marched into Denmark 
and took possession of the country in the early morning hours of April 9, 
1940. 3 At the same time German cruisers entered the harbor of Middelfart 
on the west coast of Fyn. Other ships landed troops on the east coast of 
Fyn and at the Korsor. 4 

At the very moment when the German Army began its invasion of the 
country, the German Minister to Denmark informed the government that 
German troops had occupied Denmark’s most important military objec¬ 
tives. He then handed over a memorandum which stated that the territory 
of Denmark had been occupied in order to forestall violations of Denmark’s 
neutrality by the Allies. In this memorandum the Danish Government was 
requested to cooperate with the German troops and a solemn promise was 
given by the German Government that neither the territorial integrity nor 
the political independence of Denmark would be challenged. 6 

After receiving notice of these events, as well as the memorandum, King 
Christian met with the government to consider the situation. The con¬ 
clusion was reached that since a large part of the military objectives w’ere 
already occupied, resistance would result only in bloodshed and destruction. 

1 The Danish-German Non-Aggression Pact was signed on May 31, 1939. Article 1 of 
this treaty reads as follows: 

“The Kingdom of Denmark and the German Reich will in no case resort to war or any 
other use of force against each other. 

“In case any third power should take action of the nature described in the first paragraph 
against either contracting party, the other contracting party will not in any way render sup¬ 
port to such action." Nordisk Tidsskrift for International Ret (Copenhagen, etc.), Vol. 
10 (1939), Fasc. 1 “Scandinavian Documents," p. 66. 

2 In introducing the Danish-German Non-Aggression Pact to the Rigsdag on June 1, 

1939, the Danish Foreign Minister, Dr. Munch, stated: 

“This agreement, therefore, is in close conformity with the policy pursued by Denmark 
for a long time. The Government are convinced that in the troubled conditions prevailing 
in the world it will be of considerable value. . . ." Ibid., o. 68. 

As to the interpretation of the Danish-German Non-Aggression Pact, see Erik Bniel, 
“Den Dansk-Tyske Ikke-Angrebspagt," ibid., Vol. 10, Fasc. 1, p. 50. English text, ibid., 
Fasc. 4, p. 157. 

* The first German units crossed the frontier at Aabenraa at 4:30 a.m. 

4 “The Nazi Invasion of Denmark," Notes on Denmark: Before and After the German In¬ 
vasion (American Friends of Danish Freedom and Democracy, New York, 1941), p. 5b- 

6 A memorandum containing the same text, mutatis mutandis, was presented on April 9, 

1940, to the Norwegian Government. (See “Norway," below.) See Nordisk Tidsskrift 
for International Ret, Vol. n (1940), Fasc. 3-4, D-45-48. English text, ibid., “Scandina¬ 
vian Documents," p. 143. 




A protest was presented to the German authorities against the invasion. 
Then the King gave orders to Danish troops everywhere to cease resistance; 
but before orders were received fighting had taken place along the border. 

On the same day a proclamation was issued to the people of Denmark 
signed by the King and Prime Minister, which reads as follows: 

To the Danish People! German troops last night crossed the Danish frontier and 
have landed in various places. The Danish Government have decided under protest 
to arrange the affairs of the country with a view to the occupation which has taken 
place, in pursuance whereof die following announcement is made: 

The German troops which are now present in the country enter into contact with the 
Danish defence force, and it is the duty of the population to refrain from any resistance 
to these troops. The Danish Government will endeavour to safeguard the Danish 
people and our country against the disasters resulting from war conditions and there¬ 
fore urge the population to adopt a calm and restrained attitude to the conditions 
which have now arisen. Quiet and order must prevail in the country and a loyal atti¬ 
tude must be displayed to all who have authority to exercise.® 


The King added the following personal warning: 

Under the present conditions which are so momentous for our fatherland, I beg you 
all in town and country to maintain a perfectly correct and dignified behaviour, re¬ 
membering that any ill-considered deed or word may entail the gravest consequences. 
God keep you all! God keep Denmark! 7 

On the same day both houses of the Rigsdag met in joint session; the 
Prime Minister made a full report on the situation; and the Rigsdag ap¬ 
proved the government’s action. 

II. Occupation 


On April 9, 1940, the commander of the German troops (Kaupisch) issued 
a proclamation to the Danish Army and the Danish nation stating that 
England and France had declared war on Germany without reason and in 
opposition to the sincere wishes of the German Government and people. He 
accused England of violating Danish as well as Norwegian neutrality and 
of preparing for a battle off the Danish and Norwegian coasts. In order 
to “forestall M the English attack, the German armed forces assumed “the 
protection of the neutrality of the Kingdoms of Denmark and Norway.” 
The proclamation also referred to the agreements in course of negotiation 
with the Danish Government, the purpose of which was “to make sure that 
the Danish Kingdom shall continue to exist, that the fleet shall be main¬ 
tained, that the liberty of the Danish people shall be respected, and that the 
future independence of that country shall be secured.” 8 The Danish 

® Ibid., p. 146. Sec also Notes on Denmark, pp. 57-58. 

7 Notes on Denmark, p. 58. 8 See proclamation, below, p. 377. 



military and civil authorities were asked to enter into contact with the 
German commanders and the people were requested to continue to work and 
to preserve order. 

In the first stage of occupation, as it developed from April 9, 1940, until 
August 29, 1943, the structure of the occupation was as follows: Danish 
governmental institutions remained essentially unchanged. The King 
carried out his royal functions. Even elections to Parliament took place on 
March 3, 1943. 9 The administration of the country and legislation were in 
the hands of the Danish Government. Requests of the German Government 
or of the occupation authorities were presented to the Danish Government 
by the German Minister or by the commander of the German forces in Den¬ 
mark. The Danish Government tried, through negotiations, through meet¬ 
ing some requests of the occupation authorities and rejecting others, to make 
the occupation as little of a burden as possible to the population. In their 
negotiations the German representatives used mainly the threat that if their 
requests should not be complied with, they would not be bound by the 
promise of April 9, 1940, as to safeguarding the Danish Government and 
institutions; and also, as Denmark was dependent on German coal and fuel, 
they threatened to cut off the importation of these essential commodities. 

Although the administration was left to the Danish Government, the 
Germans displayed a particular interest in the police. They required that 
the Danish police force be increased and trained according to German 
methods. In the autumn of 1941 the Polizeiverwaltung Ddnemark was es¬ 
tablished. The army of occupation also succeeded in having appointed a 
police minister acceptable to it. The Gestapo assumed control of news and 
information channels. Censorship was established, but handled by Dan¬ 
ish authorities under German guidance. Movement into and out of the 
country was also controlled. In the summer of 1940 the Germans sug¬ 
gested a customs and currency union and a kind of common citizenship. 
The Danish Government rejected this proposal. 10 

At the end of 1940 the Germans asked the Danish Cabinet for the retire¬ 
ment of Premier Stauning and five other members of the cabinet. This 
request was also rejected. 

When the German Minister made a demand for ten of the modern torpedo 
boats which formed the larger part of the Danish fleet, the demand was re¬ 
fused and attention called to the German promise of April 9, 1940, that the 
Danish Navy was to be maintained. The answer of the German Minister 
was that Germany wished to hire the boats for use in training crews for 
patrol in the Baltic, to which the Danes replied that their Navy was not for 
hire. Then the German Minister declared that if the demand was not 
complied with, the boats would be expropriated and delivery of German 

9 Bulletin of International News , Vol. XX, No. 7 (April 3, 1943), p. 309^ 

10 Gunnar Leistikow, “Denmark under the Nazi Heel, Foreign Affairs (Council on 
Foreign Relations, Inc., New York), Vol. 21 (1943). PP* 346, 347. 



coal would cease. Under these circumstances the boats were delivered 
after being disarmed and partly dismantled by the Danes. 11 


Since the beginning of the occupation German authorities have exercised 
strong pressure upon the Danish Government to introduce, first, anti- 
Jewish legislation and regulations for deporting the 5,000 Danish Jews from 
Denmark; and, second, anticommunist legislation after Denmark’s acces¬ 
sion to the Anti-Comintern Pact. The Danish Government, especially 
King Christian, categorically opposed the first request, so that no anti- 
Jewish legislation was enacted. 12 

The pressure regarding anticommunistic legislation was continuous. 
Hitler succeeded in getting accessions to the Anti-Comintern Pact by his 
Axis partners Italy and Japan, and also by Hungary, Spain, Finland, Bul¬ 
garia, Croatia, Rumania, Slovakia, Manchukuo, and puppet China. This 
pact, signed initially November 25, 1936, provided that common action 
should be taken by the signatory parties against communism, and that they 
should furnish one another with information as to the activities of the Com¬ 
munist International. Under the terms of the Anti-Comintern Pact, a 
permanent Executive Committee for its implementation was provided, with 
headquarters in Berlin. After Germany marched into Russia the pressure 
on Denmark was increased and it finally acceded to the pact on November 
25, 1941. 13 As a result of this signature a law was issued prohibiting com¬ 
munistic associations and activities in Denmark. 14 All such associations 
were dissolved and conduct or propaganda in favor of communism was pro¬ 
hibited. Communist activities were made punishable by fines, detention, 
or imprisonment up to one year. Of particular interest is Section 2 of this 
law, which provides for taking persons into custody who give reason for the 
presumption that “they intend to take part in communistic activities or 
propaganda.” Those who are charged with such acts or intentions may be 
interned by decision of the Minister of Justice when it is deemed necessary 
“for the sake of the security of the state or of its relations with 
foreign states.” However, every person taken into custody under the 
above-mentioned conditions must be brought within twenty-four hours be¬ 
fore the City Court of Copenhagen, which decides whether custody shall be 
continued. Internment shall last as long as is deemed “necessary for the 

11 Gunnar Leistikow , 41 Denmark under the Nazi Heel,” Foreign Affairs (Council on Foreign 
Relations, Inc., New York), Vol. 21 (1943), P- 34 «; Bulletin of International News, Vol. 
XVIII, No. 4 (February 22, 1941), p. 229. 

12 After the Germans requested the adoption of anti-Jewish laws, the King attended 
services in a synagogue in Copenhagen. He is reported to have explained to the German 
officials that there was no Jewish question in Denmark because Danes “never had had any 
minority feelings toward the Jews." Leistikow, op. cit., p. 352. 

13 For accession of Denmark to the Anti-Comintern Pact, see Lovtidenden-C, No. 2, July 
2, 1942. 

14 Law No. 349, August 22, 1941, below, p. 381. 


security of the state or of its relations with foreign states.” The Minister 
of Justice is required to report every third month to a special committee 
created within the Rigsdag concerning the persons interned and the reasons 
for such action. 


There is no law on compulsory labor or conscription, but Danish workers 
are being compelled to accept work in Germany because of the occupant’s 
pressure upon the Danish Government, exerted chiefly through the require¬ 
ment that the government withhold unemployment relief from those Danes 
' who do not accept offers of work in Germany. 16 lhe government has also 
been compelled to permit several exemptions or privileges for Danish workers 
leaving for Germany. 


From the beginning the occupation of Denmark resulted in the draining 
of the natural resources and stocks of commodities from the country by the 

occupant. 16 , . _ 

Because of the behavior of the German armed forces, the Danish Govern¬ 
ment felt compelled to enact a law regulating the sale of merchandise to 
them. 17 By this means the Danes, who were not strong enough to prevent 
completely German purchases, endeavored to organize them through inter¬ 
governmental channels, wherein they could maintain a certain control over 
such transactions. This law stated that the German armed forces in Den¬ 
mark “ as a rule receive all supplies of food, forage, and all other commodities 
from Germany.” That this statement, however, was in the main illusory is 
evident from the further content of the same law, which provided among 
other things for the sale of butter, meat, lard, milk, eggs, and cheese without 
restriction except that such sales must be made through Danish export 
agencies controlled by the Danish Government. Other goods could be sold 
by the Danes to the German armed forces only by special permission issued 
by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, although such permission was not re¬ 
quired when the price of the commodities did not exceed 200 kroner in each 
individual case. 18 Under the pressure of the occupant, the Danish Govern¬ 
ment was forced to agree that in sales to the German armed forces or to in¬ 

is According to various sources, about 50,000 Danes have had to leave Denmark and work 
for Germany, either inside Germany or in other occupied countries. See Leistikow, op. at., 

PP « The army was “on the hunt,” so to speak, for food. " In the first days of the; occupa¬ 
tion vou could see biu, serious-looking fellows in uniform standing outside dairy-shops and 

ickine uD h df a pound of butter, without bread, like ice-cream-” Joachim Joesten 

“ Denmark Unde?the Jackboot,” The Fortnightly (London), Vol. 148, New Series (1940). 

PP n Law No. 639 of December 11, 1940, below p. 380. 

is since 200 kroner is equivalent to about $40, the aggregate 
transactions may well have been large. 

value of these exempted 



dividual units thereof “the Danish seller is entitled only to receive payment 
in the form of checks.” In sales involving less than 200 kroner, however, 
payments may be made in cash. This specific regulation as to payment by 
checks in larger transactions was a special form of forced long-term borrow¬ 
ing from the Danes. 

As the war continued, the curtailing of German buying became one of the 
main concerns of the Danish Government, because the Germans wished to 
purchase everything they could lay their hands on. They tried to buy or 
lease Danish merchantmen and smaller transport ships from Danish ship¬ 
ping firms, and the Danish Government was therefore compelled to issue 
several laws making such sales or leases dependent on the permission of the 
government. 19 After the occupation of the Ukraine, which was stripped by 
the retreating Russian armies of all agricultural implements, 20 the occupant 
sought to buy agricultural implements from Denmark. The Danish Gov¬ 
ernment then promulgated a law 21 to the effect that sale to foreign countries 
of agricultural machinery or implements without permission of the Danish 
Directorate for Supply of Commodities is prohibited. 

In order to further reduce German purchases, a law was enacted prohibit¬ 
ing the Danes, without the permission of the Danish National Bank, from 
receiving payments in any form from persons who are not residents of Den¬ 
mark. 22 Because, in particular, of the German endeavors to penetrate into 
Danish companies, the transfer of Danish securities to foreigners was 
forbidden. 23 


The main exploitation of Denmark is carried out through the institution 
of clearing. 24 Under a clearing arrangement with the Danish National 
Bank, all trade settlements between Germany and Denmark are made 
through the Verrcchnungskasse in Berlin and the Clearing Institute in 
Copenhagen. Under the mechanism of clearing, 25 the balances of imports 
and exports must be equal; but Germany is constantly overimporting from 
Denmark without counterexporting the equivalents. In 1942 Germany 
owed to Denmark on account of the clearing trade “ two and one-half billion 
kroner, equivalent to nearly one-fourth of the national wealth.” 26 

In order to continue the exports from Denmark, the occupant is forcing 
the Danish National Bank to advance sums to the Danish exporters. To 

? 10 See Law No. 482, September 14, 1940, Lovtidendcn-A, No. 99, September 17, 1940; Law 
No. 148, March 31, 1941 (ibid., No. 20, March 31,1941); Law No. 205, April 25, 1941 (ibid., 
No. 29, April 30, 1941). 

20 See below, chapter on "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." 

21 Law No. 61, February 26, 1943, Lovtidenden-A , No. 14. 

22 Law No. 415, October 2, 1941, below, p. 379. 23 Ibid. 

21 See Section 17 of Law No. 337 of June 25, 1940, below, p. 378. 

26 See above, chapter on "Finance." 

M Lei8tiko\v, op. cit., p. 350. It is obvious that at the time this book is written 1 he amount 
of the debt has considerably increased—according to some information, to about four 
billion kroner. 



meet the increasing currency requirements, the volume of Danish cur¬ 
rency is being expanded, and this in turn is causing inflation. 27 


The problem of administration of justice in Denmark is of particular im¬ 
portance and has been one of the main topics of negotiations and the cause 
of strained relations between the Danish Government and the army of oc¬ 
cupation. The question arose as to which courts, German or Danish, 
should try Danish citizens libeled or accused of sabotage and attacks upon 
the German Army. One of the German commanders agreed that a group of 
Danish citizens should not be tried by German justice, provided alterations 
were made in the Danish Penal Code. With some exceptions these cases 
were tried by Danish courts under a law of January 18, 1941, until a new 
military commander was appointed. 


As the occupation authorities did not legislate at all in Denmark, pressure 
was brought on the Danish Government as above stated to introduce legis¬ 
lation which would meet the requirements of the occupying power. Ac¬ 
cordingly, the following Danish enactments were published: a law requiring 
deposit of certain naval and radio apparatus; 28 a law prohibiting the pho¬ 
tographing of German military establishments; 29 a law to control the private 
possession of firearms; 80 a law on importation of or trade in firearms and 
munitions; 81 a law concerning movement in military zones; 3- a law prohibit¬ 
ing photographing of bombed areas and damaged ships. 88 The Penal Code 
was supplemented by provisions establishing penalties for giving informa¬ 
tion on military establishments and military forces and for aiding opponents 
of the military forces occupying Denmark, 3 * 1 and by several laws concerning 
navigation, 85 etc. 

Another addition to the Danish Penal Code provided that Danish courts 
may impose sentence of imprisonment of from one year to life for sabotage, 
espionage, and other acts which may prejudice the relations between Den¬ 
mark and the occupying power “under agreement.’* Under a proclama¬ 
tion dated June 9, 1941, any acts or demonstrations which may disrupt 
relations with the occupying troops are punishable by imprisonment up to 
two years, if more severe penalties are not already provided by law. In 
May, 1942, the maximum penalty for the dissemination of rumors was in- 

* 7 Leistikow, op. cit., p. 350. ... . vr . 

28 Law No. 190, April 16, 1940, Lovtidenden-A , No. 41, April 17, 1940. 

29 Law No. 220, May I, 1940. ibid-, No. 47 . May 1, 1940. 

80 Law No. 246, May 10, 1940, ibid., No. 53, May 11, I 94 °- 
« Law No. 266, May 23, 1940, ibid., No. 59, May 24, 1940. 
a* Law No. 562, October 31, 1940, ibid.. No. no, November 5, I 94 °* 

33 Law No. 633. December 4. i 94 °.» ibid.. No. Ii8, December 9. I 94 °- 

34 Law No. 14, January 18, 1941, ibid., No. 3, January 20, 1941. 

35 Law No. 346, August 16, 1941, ibid., No. 53, August 20, 1941; Law No. 359, August 22, 
1941, ibid., No. 55, August 29, 194L 


creased to three years’ imprisonment. Where military information is in¬ 
volved, life sentence may be imposed. 

As regards prosecutions under these provisions, a law of May, 1941, 
provides that documents may be withheld, choice of counsel may be denied, 
lay assessors may be excluded from the lower court, and appeal may be made 
directly to the Supreme Court, thus avoiding trial by jury in the upper court. 
The German occupant insists on these cases being tried, secretly, in order 
not to stir up public opinion. 

III. The Revolt of August, 1943 

As acts of sabotage increased during the summer of 1943, the German 
Minister to Denmark, Werner Best, made an official request, in the form of 
an ultimatum, that saboteurs should be tried by German military courts. 
The Danish Government did not accept this ultimatum and resigned. In 
the meantime the population, backing the government, showed signs of un¬ 
rest; acts of sabotage occurred, and in the first days of September open 
clashes occurred between the German armed forces and Danish patriots. 
The German commander thereupon declared martial law, and interned the 
government and the King. The German Army took over control of various 
localities in Denmark. At the same time the German military com¬ 
mander assumed control of the administration of the country and made an 
appeal to the different agencies of government to continue work, under 
threat of penalties for strikes. When the occupying power endeavored to 
take over the Danish Navy, part of it was scuttled by Danish patriots and 
part of it escaped to Sweden. 35 

IV. Effect of German Occupation of Denmark 
on Iceland and Greenland 

1 .—Iceland 

In accordance with the Danish Act of Union of November 30, 1918, Ice¬ 
land and Denmark have been since 1918 two fully sovereign states united 
by a common King. In this document Denmark expressly admits that the 
status of Iceland is that of a free and sovereign state on a footing of complete 
equality with Denmark. 37 

™ At the time of writing the above, the actual situation in Denmark is in a state of insta¬ 
bility, fluctuating from day to day, under the influence of the strengthened Danish resistance 
and German measures of oppression. 

37 See the following provisions of the Act of Union: 

“ Part 1 .—Sec. I. Denmark and Iceland shall be free and sovereign States united under a 
common King, and by the agreement contained in this Law of Union; the names of both 
States shall be included in the King's title. 

“Part 7.—19. Denmark shall give notice to foreign Powers that, in agreement with the 
contents of this Law of Union, Iceland has been recognized as a sovereign State, and shall 
also give notice that Iceland declares herself permanently neutral and has no naval flag.” 
British and Foreign State Papers, 1917-1918, Vol. ill, pp. 703, 706. 



Whefr Denmark was occupied by German forces, the Iceland Parliament 
(Althing), on April io, 1940, conferred upon the Icelandic Government the 
powers of the King with respect to Iceland, in the following resolutions: 

Having regard to the fact that the situation created makes it impossible for the King 
of Iceland to execute the royal power given to him under the Constitutional Act, the 
Althing declares that the Government of Iceland is for the time being entrusted with 
this power. 

Having regard to the situation now created, Denmark is not in a position to execute 
the authority to take charge of the foreign affairs of Iceland, nor can it carry out the 
fishery inspection within Icelandic territorial waters. Therefore the Althing declares 

that Iceland will for the time being take the entire charge of these affairs.* 8 


This was done in conformity with Article 4 of the Constitution of Iceland 
of May 18, 1920, in which it is provided that should the King be unable to 
discharge his constitutional functions, “the rules in force in Denmark on 
the 1st December, 1918” shall apply likewise to Iceland. 39 In the Danish 
Act of February 11, 1871, 40 it is provided that in case the King is ill or absent 
or unable to make decisions as to succession, the cabinet shall immediately 
convoke the Rigsdag, which shall decide who shall carry on the government. 
Consequently the Althing felt authorized to take over governmental func¬ 
tions and to provide for carrying on the government while the King of Den¬ 
mark was unable to do so. 

The Act of Union of 1918 gives each country, among other things, the 
right to demand the commencement of negotiations for revision of the agree¬ 
ments therein contained on the expiration of the year 1940, and in the event 
that agreement is not reached within three years from the date of the peti¬ 
tion, the law may be annulled by action of the Danish Rigsdag and the 
Icelandic Althing, respectively. 41 The relationship between Iceland and 
Denmark is characterized by some authors as being of a contractual charac¬ 
ter, in which case, according to the principle clausula rebus sic stantibus , 
either partner has the right to rescind the contract on the ground of changed 
conditions. 42 

On May 17, 1941, the Althing took further steps toward gaining inde¬ 
pendence by the passage of the following resolution: 

The Althing considers that Iceland has acquired the right to sever entirely the Act of 
Union with Denmark, as Iceland has had to take into its own hands the conduct of all 
its affairs, Denmark not being in a position to conduct such affairs as it undertook to 
deal with on Iceland’s behalf under the Danish-Icelandic Act of Union of 1918. 

88 Bulletin of International News , Vol. XIX, No. 17 (August 22, 1942), p. 744. See also 
Sveinbjorn Johnson in “Iceland and the Americas,” American Bar Association Journal , 
Vol. 26 (1940), P- 5 ° 8 - 

39 British and Foreign State Papers , Vol. 125, p. 851. 

40 Holger Federspiel, Kongeriget Danmarks Love (Copenhagen, 1910), p. 725. 

41 See Part 6 of Act of Union, British and Foreign State Papers , Vol. 111, p. 7 ° 6 * 

48 Some authors believe that the Act of Union was neither a statute nor a treaty but a 
lertium quid. See Philip E. Mosely, “Iceland and Greenland: An American Problem,” 
Foreign Affairs, Vol. 18 (1940). P- 74 2 * 



On the part of Iceland there shall be no question of renewing the Act of Urtion with 
Denmark, although!t is not thought expedient in present circumstances to accomplish 
the formal severance of the Union and settle the Constitution of the State in its final 
form; this, however, is to be postponed no longer than until the end of the war. 

A Regent shall be elected for one year at a time, such power being vested in him as 
was vested in the Government of Iceland by a Resolution of the Althing of April io, 
1940, concerning the supreme power in the affairs of the State. 

A Republic shall be established in Iceland as soon as the Union with Denmark has 
been formally dissolved. 48 

On June 17, 194 U the Althing elected the Regent of Iceland in the person 
of Mr. Sveinn Bjornsson. He was reelected for another year on April 21, 
I943- 44 

In the meantime, while these constitutional changes were taking place in 
Iceland, the Allies were taking military steps in order to forestall an extension 
of the German occupation to Iceland. On May 10, 1940, British forces 
occupied the island. 46 Later, on July 1, 1941, an exchange of messages took 
place between the Prime Minister of Iceland and the President of the United 
States. It was stated by the Prime Minister that it would be in the interest 
of Iceland if the United States would undertake the protection of that coun¬ 
try during the war by sending troops to Iceland to supplement and even¬ 
tually replace the British forces, which were required elsewhere. Iceland 
was ready to entrust such protection to the United States subject to the 
conditions, among others, that the United States would promise to withdraw 
these forces on conclusion of the present war, and would promise to recog¬ 
nize the absolute independence and sovereignty of Iceland and to exercise its 
best efforts at the time of negotiation of a peace treaty to the end that such 
treaty should likewise recognize the absolute independence and sovereignty 
of Iceland; a further condition was that the United States would not inter¬ 
fere with the Government of Iceland, either while the armed forces remained 
in the country or afterward. In his reply the President of the United States 
accepted all the conditions set forth in the Prime Minister's message. 40 In 
accordance with the understanding so reached, forces of the United States 
Navy arrived in Iceland on July 7. 47 On July 11, 1941, the Althing, by 39 
votes to 3, approved the landing of the United States forces and sanctioned 
the agreement made with the President. 48 

48 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XIX, No. 17 (August 22, 1942), p. 745. 

44 Ibid., Vol. XX, No. 9 (May 1, 1943), p. 408. 

46 The Faroe Islands were also occupied by the British. 

40 II. R. Doc. 307, 77th Cong., 1st Sess., pp. 1-5; Department of State, Bulletin , Vol. V, 
No. 106 (July 5, 1941), pp. 15-17; Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 15 (Julv 
26, 1941), p. 948. 

47 See message of the President to Congress, dated July 7, 1941, Department of State, 
Bulletin, Vol. V, No. 106 (Tuly 5, 1941), p. 15. 

48 Prime Minister Churchill explained that Great Britain adhered to such an agreement, 
that under it both governments recognized the independence of Iceland and that her status 
was improved “by the change from occupation by a belligerent to defense, at her own invi¬ 
tation, by a non-belligerent. Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 15 (July 26, 

194O, p. 987. 


2 .—Greenland 

Greenland, the largest island of the world, with a native population of 
approximately 17,000 people (including 4 00 Danes), was cut off from 
the Danish metropolis through the German occupation of Denmark in 

A year later, on April 9, 1941, an executive agreement was signed by the 
Secretary of State of the United States of America, Cordell Hull, and Henrik 
de Kauffmann in his capacity as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Pleni¬ 
potentiary of H.M. the King of Denmark at Washington, to the effect that 
the government of the United States was entitled to establish military 
bases in Greenland. On this occasion the United States Government 
reiterated its recognition of and respect for the sovereignty of the Kingdom 
of Denmark over Greenland. The reasons for this agreement are given in its 
preamble as follows: 

One. After the invasion and occupation of Denmark on April 9, 1940 by foreign 
military forces, the United Greenland Councils at their meeting at Godhavn on May 
3, 1940 adopted in the name of the people of Greenland a resolution reiterating their 
oath of allegiance to King Christian X of Denmark and expressing the hope that, for as 
long as Greenland remains cut off from the mother country, the Government of the 
United States of America will continue to hold in mind the exposed position of the 
Danish flag in Greenland, of the native Greenland and Danish population, and of 
established public order; and 

Two. The Governments of all of the American Republics have agreed that the 
status of regions in the Western Hemisphere belonging to European powers is a subject 
of deep concern to the American Nations, and that the course of military events in 
Europe and the changes resulting from them may create the grave danger that European 
territorial possessions in America may be converted into strategic centers of aggression 
against nations of the American Continent; and 

Three. Defense of Greenland against attack by a non-American power is essential 
to the preservation of the peace and security of the American Continent and is a sub¬ 
ject of vital concern to the United States of America and also to the Kingdom of Den¬ 
mark; and 

Four. Although the sovereignty of Denmark over Greenland is fully recognized, 
the present circumstances for the time being prevent the Government in Denmark 
from exercising its powers in respect of Greenland. 4 ® 

After the signature of the agreement Minister de Kauffmann was informed 
by the Danish Government in Copenhagen that it did not approve the agree¬ 
ment which he had made with the United States and that he was recalled as 
Danish Minister to Washington. This act of the Danish Government 
under occupation was considered both by Minister de Kauffmann and the 
United States Government as performed under duress. The Minister of 
Denmark was informed by the State Department that it continued to 

4 ® Agreement between the United States of America and Denmark, signed April 9. 1941- 
Executive Agreement Series 204, Defense of Greenland (Department of State Publication 
1602, 1941), pp. 1 2. 



recognize him as the duly authorized Minister of Denmark in Washing¬ 
ton. 50 

In the course of the execution of this agreement, an American-Danish 
Greenland Commission was created in New York in order to carry on eco¬ 
nomic relations between Greenland and the United States. 

60 Department of State, Bulletin , Vol. IV, No. 95 (April 19, 194.1), p. 471. 

The validity of the Greenland agreement has been questioned by some authors on the 
ground that neither de Kauffmann nor the Greenland Councils had capacity to make inter¬ 
national agreements. See editorial comment of Herbert W. Briggs, American Journal of 
International Law , Vol. 35 (1941), p. 512. 

As the purpose of this volume is to deal with Axis rule in Europe, however, the author does 
not consider it as within his province to discuss here the validity of the Greenland agreement. 



The Channel Islands, which are situated off the northwest coast of France, 
are the only portions of the Dukedom of Normandy now belonging to the 
English Crown, to which they have been attached since the Norman Con¬ 
quest. There are four principal islands: Jersey (area, 45 square miles; pop¬ 
ulation, 49,701); Guernsey (area, 24.5 square miles; population, 38,283); 
Alderney (area, 3.06 square miles; population, 1,598); and Sark (area, 2 
square miles; population, 614). 

After the fall of France and the British military reverses, the British Gov¬ 
ernment removed all troops from the Channel Islands and declared them to be 
demilitarized. A considerable number of inhabitants—about 40,000-—left 
for England bn ships which were sent over from England for their embarka¬ 
tion. 1 The Germans, however, ignored the proclamation of demilitarization 
and bombed the harbors of St. Helier and St. Peter Port, and the next day 
invaded the islands by air. 2 Guernsey was occupied by German military 
forces on June 30, 1940, and Jersey on July 1, 1940. 

Administration . The Channel Islands are administered by a German 
local military commander, who is under orders of the military commander in 
France. On August 23, 1940, an order was published by the Chief of the 
Military Administration in France to the effect that “the general orders 
issued or to be issued by the Supreme Commander of the Army for the area 
of the Chief Command of the Military Administration in France are ap¬ 
plicable, by way of analogy, to the occupied English Channel Islands.” 3 
Thus the Channel Islands, though still belligerent territory, and the occupa¬ 
tion regime which was established in French territory affected by the Armis¬ 
tice Agreement of June 22, 1940, are under the same German military 

French having been the official language of the islands before the occupa¬ 
tion (although English is the main language of business and religion and is 
familiar to all), it is possible for the population to become acquainted with 
the orders of the military commander in France, which are published in both 

German and French. 

Finance. The branches of the English banks were evacuated. The Ger¬ 
mans have recreated a local currency and put into circulation notes of 3d., 
6d. and 2/6d., and have issued an order to open the local banking institu¬ 
tions. Advances equivalent to several million pounds sterling have been 
made by them to the local states. 4 

1 Sixty Channel Island societies have been formed in England in different parts of the 
country to help refugees from the islands. London 7 tww, June 30, 1943, p. 3. 

* Ibid. s See below, p. 384- London Times , June 30, 1943 , P- 3 - 




Deportations to Germany . In the autumn of 1942, a great number of the 
islanders, men and women of ages up to 70 years, were deported to camps 
in France and Germany. As the inhabitants, because of their insular life, 
dwelt in closer association than is usual among peoples of the mainland— 
almost like one big family—these deportations were a great shock to the 
population. Farewell services were held in the churches and the deportees 
were presented with clothing and food by those remaining behind. 6 Among 
the deportees was the Seigneur of the Island of Sark, American-born R. W. 
Mathaway, who became a British citizen, and acquired the title of “Seig¬ 
neur” through his marriage to Dame Sibyl Mary Beaumont, ruler of Sark 
under charter of Queen Elizabeth. 6 

6 London Times , June 30, 1943, p. 3. 

6 See Neiv York Times , April 30, 1943, p. 6, col. I. On the relationship of the Channel 
Islands to the British Empire and their historic connection with the Duchy of Normandy, 
see “Xhe Channel Islands,” by Dr. R. R. Marctt, in The British Isles } “The Oxford Survey 
of the British Empire” (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1914), pp. 481 ff. 



The Territorial Administrative Division 

After the armistice agreements which France signed with Germany and 
Italy, 1 the following administrative setup was created: Northern France 
and Pas-de-Calais were placed under the administration of the same German 
military commander as Belgium. Both for Alsace and Lorraine special 
civil administrations (Zivilverwaltangen) were established within the frame¬ 
work of the neighboring German Reich districts ( Reichsgaue ) into which they 
were incorporated. Thus, Lorraine was incorporated into Westmark 2 and 
Alsace into'Moselland. The district of Mentone was occupied by Italian 
forces. In November, 1942, Italian occupation was extended to the Alpes- 
Maritimes, Haute-Savoie, and the Rhone valley. 3 The areas, apart from 
Alsace-Lorraine, which were included under the armistice agreement in the 
territory known as Occupied France were administered by a German military 
commander in Paris. The rest of France (known as unoccupied France) 
was administered from Vichy. When the German troops occupied all 
France in November, 1942, the Vichy regime was not displaced, the German 
authorities exercising only supervision and Gestapo activities. 

On the grounds of military security, a special r6gime was established along 
the coastline to which outsiders are not permitted access (prohibited zone), 
as well as in the cities of Marseilles and Toulon. 

I. Alsace-Lorraine 

The regime in Alsace-Lorraine 4 is directed toward the complete assimila¬ 
tion of the political, cultural, and social institutions, as well as the economy 
of the two provinces, with those of the Greater German Reich. These tasks 
are in the hands of specially appointed Chiefs of Civil Administration, one 
for Lorraine and another for Alsace. These Chiefs of Civil Administration 
have the title of Gauleiter. Thus Alsace and Lorraine represent for the time 
being special administrative units, but they are incorporated into the normal 
German administrative districts ( Gaue ). Alsace, as has been stated, is 
thus incorporated'into the District of Moselland, and Lorraine into the Dis- 

1 Armistice between France and Germany, June 22, 1940; Armistice between France and 
Italy, June 24, 1940. American Journal of International Law , Supp., Vol. 34 (1940), pp. 

17 *'BJudin of International News, Vol. XVII, No. 26 (December 31, 1940), p. 1679. 

* After the collapse of Italy in the summer of 1943, the Italian troops evacuated French 

territory, and were replaced by German troops. . .. . . , 

4 The legislation promulgated in Alsace is similar to that promulgated tn Lorraine, and 
hence it seems sufficient here to refer only to the decrees relating to Lorraine. 

I 7 i 



trict of Westmark. Alsace and Lorraine have been barred from communica¬ 
tion with the rest of France by a customs frontier. Communications be¬ 
tween Alsatians and Lorrainers on one side and Frenchmen on the other side 
of the customs frontier are allowed only within the limits of the so-called 
small frontier traffic, involving persons living in the immediate neighborhood 
of the frontier. 5 The policies of the Chief of the Civil Administration are 
designed, as indicated above, to promote the complete assimilation of 
Alsace and Lorraine with the other parts of the German districts, so that 
in the future a special administration for Alsace and Lorraine will not be 
necessary. At the time of the completion of this volume no express provi¬ 
sion of law as to the annexation of Alsace-Lorraine by Germany is known to 
the author. Apparently the occupant has refrained from any such express 
provision because of collaboration with Vichy. However, the treatment of 
these territories may justify a statement that they have been de facto an¬ 
nexed to Germany. This seems to be the opinion of Frenchmen. One of 
the French leaders, General Giraud, stated in his address of March 14, 1943: 
“Alsace and Lorraine have been de facto incorporated into Germany. No 
voice of protest has been heard in France. Here, we protest. All the world 
must know that France does not accept this annexation. Alsace and 
Lorraine will again become French in a completely liberated France.” 8 

In carrying out the policies of assimilation above mentioned, the occupant 
introduced into Lorraine, as of January 1, 1941, the German Municipal 
Code of January 30, 1935. 7 French citizens of German origin were granted 
German citizenship. The official language in administration, as well 
as in courts and business, was declared to be German. A decree was 
issued requiring that the names of persons be written wdth the German 
spelling. German equivalents must be used for French given names, and 
where no such equivalent exists a German given name is to be adopted. 8 
Towns were also given equivalent German names.® With the exception of 
business firms, associations and organizations of all kinds have been dissolved, 
in order that reorganization on National Socialist principles may take place. 10 
The education of the youth was put under Nazi control. In the order of 
December 6, 1940, 11 the Chief of the Civil Administration in Lorraine 
stated: “In order to assure the uniform institution of National Socialist 
schooling for youth, as w r ell as adaptation to the school system of the Reich, 

. . . all private schools and school camps shall be closed.” Grammar 
schools were made public and German; and only persons of German or re- 

6 Decree of March 26, 1941, Verordnungsblatt, 1941, p. 224. 

6 “L'Alsace et la Lorraine, de fait, viennent d’etre incorpor6es b TAHemagne. Aucune 
voix en France ne s’est 61 ev 6 e pour protester. Ici, nous protestons. Le monde entier doit 
savoir que la France n'accepte pas cette annexion. L’Aisace et la Lorraine redeviendront 
frangaises dans une France compl&tement liberce.” Pour la Vidoire (New York), March 
20, 1943, n. 2. col. 4. 

7 Verordnungsblatt, 1940, p. 445. • Decree of September 28, 1940, ibid., p. 60. 

0 Decree of January 25, 1941, ibid., 1941, P* * 39 * 

10 Decree of October 16, 1940, ibid., 1940, p. 160. 11 See below, p. 385. 



lated blood may be teachers in public elementary schools. The school must 
be actuated by the spirit of National Socialism in all its work. Permission 
must be obtained to give religious instruction, and such permission is to be 
withheld if the instructor-clergyman or his wife is not of German or related 
blood. 12 The Reformed and Lutheran churches were combined with the 
Pfaelzische Landeskirche (United Protestant-Evangelical Christian Church 
of Pfalz), so that the powers of the Reformed Synod in Alsace-Lorraine and 
of the Directorium of the Church of the Augsburg Confession in Alsace- 
Lorraine passed to the Protestant Provincial Church Council of Pfalz. 13 
The courts were Germanized, and the requirement laid down that sentences 
be pronounced “in the name of the German people.” German criminal law 
has been introduced, 14 and published materials relating to judicial matters 
appear only in the Official Gazette of the Chief of Civil Administration. 15 
In order that Germans alone may acquire real property, a decree was passed 
on October 10, 1940, to the effect that permission is necessary for acquiring 
farm, forest, or business properties, and for buying, renting, starting, build¬ 
ing, or enlarging enterprises. Moreover, the same decree authorized Ger¬ 
man authorities to close enterprises without allowing claims for indemnity. 18 

The economy of Alsace and Lorraine was organized according to the 
totalitarian pattern. Essential goods, foods, and products were requisi¬ 
tioned by decree of June 23, 1940, and are administered under German con¬ 
trol. 17 Control of prices and of wages was introduced by the decree of Au¬ 
gust 9, 1940. 18 

According to the German genocide philosophy, the imposition of the Ger¬ 
man cultural and political pattern upon Frenchmen was not sufficient. The 
Frenchmen themselves must be removed and replaced by Germans in order 
to make Alsace-Lorraine German “forever.” The occupant then resorted to 
mass transfers of the French population. According to an elaborate plan of 
replacing French population by a German imported population, about 270,- 
000 persons (including 22,000 Jews) were removed from Alsace-Lorraine to 
unoccupied France, and 200,000 to the Reich. 18 * 

II. The Occupied Zone 


The Armistice Agreement of June 22, 1940, established the limits of the 
so-called Occupied Zone as distinguished from the non-occupied zone admin¬ 
istered by Vichy. A demarcation line was introduced between the two zones 

and a decree of April 28, 1941, 19 provided penalties of imprisonment or fine 


u See order of February 14, 1941, concerning the elementary school system, below, p. 387; 
and the announcement for the execution of that order, below, p. 388. 

13 See decree of September 28, 1940, below, p. 385. 14 Verordnungsblatl, 1940, p. 5. 

13 See decree of September 10, 194 o. ibid., p. 52. 14 Ibid., p. 71. 17 Ibid., p. 5. 

w Ibid., p. 22. l8 “ See Kulischer, op. cit p. 115. 19 See below, p. 391. 




for persons who without permission crossed the demarcation line between 
the Occupied Zone and unoccupied France, or carried goods from one zone 
to another. On the occupation of all France by Germany on November 11, 
1942, 20 the demarcation line was retained, but more facilities for traffic be¬ 
tween the two zones were introduced. The Vichy zone remained thereafter 
under the administration of Vichy, the Germans taking over the administra¬ 
tion of strategic points and acting in other places mainly through the Gestapo. 

According to Article 111 of the Armistice Agreement, Germany acquired in 
the Occupied Zone the right of an occupying power. This zone has two 
types of administration. The German administration is in the hands of a 
German military commander. For purposes of military administration, 
the Occupied Zone is divided into five chief military field commands (Ober- 
feldkommandanturen). Each of these chief military field commands is di¬ 
vided into field commands ( Feldkommandanturen ) and every field command 
is divided into local commands ( Ortskommandanturen ). Officers of civil sec¬ 
tions of the military commands supervise the French authorities. For a 
certain time the German Ambassador to Paris, whose office has been contin¬ 
ued, coordinated the activities of the central German authorities with those 
of the local German authorities, as well as with those of the central French 
authorities. The main body of French authorities has been retained. 
These authorities are not only supervised by the German military authori¬ 
ties, but they also receive instructions from beyond the demarcation line. 
Moreover, the legislative power of the Vichy government extends over the 
Occupied Zone. 


Because the German military commanders play such an important r 61 e 
in controlling the country, they have been vested with extensive powers, 
among them judicial powers which in some respects supplement the func¬ 
tions of the courts.** 1 Not only the commanders of the chief field commands 
but also the heads of the ordinary field commands may issue orders regard¬ 
ing summary punishment against persons not subject to the Military Penal 
Code, and they may impose penalties up to 30,000 Reichsmarks or, in lieu 
thereof, imprisonment for a term not exceeding six weeks. Moreover, the 
same offense, if it seems to be sufficiently serious, may be tried later by a 
court. This provision is a violation of the principle ne bis in idem , even 
though in such cases it is required that the court take account of the punish¬ 
ment already imposed and mitigate its sentence accordingly. However that 
may be, it is clear that the primary purpose of the order is to give increased 
authority to the military commanders so as to enable them to act as the first 
and main protectors of the established German order. 

*®See the N&v York Times, November 12, 1942, p. i. col. 8. 

21 See order of September 10, 1940, below, p. 394. 




Among the other powers vested in military commanders is that of requir¬ 
ing members of the local population to serve as military guards, 22 failure to 
fulfill such duties being punishable by death. This is a violation of Article 
52 of the Hague Regulations, which prohibits the requisitioning of services of 
inhabitants of an occupied country in activities involving military operations. 

The personal responsibility of the inhabitants to the occupant was still 
further extended by the decree of January 31, 1942, under which the failure 
to perform personal services or comply with requisitions in kind which were 
ordered by the authorities for the German Army was made punishable by 
fine, imprisonment, hard labor, or, “in grave cases,” even by the death pen¬ 
alty. 23 Because all economic and industrial enterprises were put into the 
service of the German war economy, any interference with employment in 
such enterprises was also made punishable. Thus, for interruption of work 
or any aggressive actions by workers against employers, penalties of im¬ 
prisonment, fine, hard labor, or even death may be imposed. 24 Even before 
labor conscription was introduced, the occupant tried to induce the French 
workers to accept work in Germany, and a decree of June 22, 1942, intro¬ 
duced special privileges for persons accepting work there. The courts are 
required to adjourn cases of such persons if the military commander so re¬ 
quests. Moreover, no execution of contracts of rent and no notice thereof 
may be effectuated during the absence of workers in Germany. 23 Later on a 
labor conscription law was published by Vichy in order to provide Germany 
with labor. 28 


As mentioned above, the whole economic life is being controlled and 
channelled into the German war economy. If an enterprise is not impor¬ 
tant enough for the German war economy, it may be closed by the military 
commander, the reason given for such closing being the requirements of 
“economic conditions” and “particularly the supply of raw materials and 
equipment.” 27 

That the local economic life is subordinated to the interests of the occu¬ 
pant is to be seen from the decree of May 22, 1942, 28 according to which all 
construction projects exceeding 100,000 francs in cost require the permission 
of the German military commander. Applications for such permission are 
to be filed with the French authorities, who in turn submit them to the 
German commander. 

M See order of October IO, I 94 °> below, p. 395 * 

*« See decree of November 6, 194*. below, p. 392. 

34 Verordnungsblatt , 1942, pp. 395^9°. 

34 See below, section IV of this chapter; see also New York 
col. 6 ; p. 4. cols. 5-6, 6-8 (text of law). 

27 See decree of February 25, I 94 2 . below, p. 398. 
a* VerordnunRsbfaU , 1942. pp. 380-81. 

"See below, p. 398. 

Times, September 14, 1942, p. 1. 



In the field of finance, the same instrumentalities were applied as in Bel¬ 
gium, namely, Reich Credit Institute notes were issued and clearing agree¬ 
ments with Germany and other countries were arranged through the German 
clearing office in Berlin. Exchange control was introduced prohibiting the 
transfer of currency out of the Occupied Zone in any dealings in exchange, 
forbidding transactions of an international character, and requiring the 
surrender of foreign exchange and gold. 29 The exchange control was carried 
out by a special institute called Devisenschutzkommando Frankreich (Com¬ 
mando France for the Protection of Holdings of Foreign Exchange). 

A special Banking Supervisory Board controls French banks, especially 
the Banque de France. 90 This bank is compelled to expand its issues in 
order to meet the requirements of the occupant. 


Not only is the press regimented and subjected to preventive censorship 
but also text books of history published before the war are suppressed if they 
contain “ unjustifiable attacks on the German people and its armed forces.” 81 

Works of art, which represent in France a considerable part of the national 
wealth, immediately attracted the attention of the occupant. On July 15, 
1940, an order was issued by the Supreme Commander of the Army freez¬ 
ing such works of art. 32 Thus, movable works of art may not be removed 
from their present location or changed in any manner without the written 
authorization of the military commander. Legal transactions involving the 
transfer or sale of movable works of art are invalid without the consent of 
the military commander. Owners or possessors of such objects of art that 
are worth more than 100,000 francs are required to register them with the 
field commander’s office. The purpose of these provisions is apparent: be¬ 
cause the distressed owners could not receive the permission of the military 
commander to sell works of art to private persons at their real value, they 
were compelled to sell them at much lower prices to Germans, who could 
obtain the required permission. 

The above-mentioned decree on works of art is in violation of Article 46 
of the Hague Regulations, which requires that private property be respected. 
Respect for private property implies not only freedom from confiscation but 
also non-interference with the enjoyment of the full rights of property, in¬ 
cluding the right to dispose of it. 


The occupant apparently does not enjoy a feeling of security in the occu¬ 
pied area despite the policy of 1 ‘forced collaboration” imposed upon the 

29 See above, chapter on “Finance.” 

30 Order of July 22, 1940, Verordnungsblatt, July 26, 1940. See also Paul Jacob, Les lots 
tic I'occupation en France (New York, 1942), p. 14. 

31 See order of August 10, 1940, below, p. 391. 

33 See order of July 15, 1940, below, p. 390. 



French population. Evidence thereof is to be found, among other things, 
not only in the large extent of sabotage and the taking of hostages, but also in 
such a decree as that of February 5, 1942, forbidding medical personnel, such 
as doctors, dentists, and nurses who are not serving in the Cerman Army o 
treat members of the German armed forces or civilians of German nationality 
in the service of such forces. French medical personnel is allowed to take 

care of Germans only in emergency cases. , 

Recently, the security of the occupant has been gravely challenged n 
only by a well-organized French underground but also by a special type of 
guerrilla fight which is going on in the southeastern part of France, especiahy 
in Haute-Savoie. Young Frenchmen who escaped deportation to labor 
camps in Germany have been crossing the demarcation line between l theioc- 
cupied and unoccupied zone and fleeing into the mountains. ie e 
troops who try to capture these young Frenchmen often meet with strong re¬ 
sistance. The French population has organized a service of clandestine ic { 
for these people, whose hiding places are called mciquis. 

III. Italian Zone 

Following its Armistice Agreement with France of June 24, 1940. taly 
assumed the rights of an occupying power over several localities on the 
French side of the frontier. 33 * In these localities Italian civil commissioners 
were established for purposes of administration. However, the main 
institutions of French administration remained. This is also true as to the 
local courts, except that trials for serious offenses committed by the inhab¬ 
itants of the occupied territories may be referred to the Court of Assizes in 
Turin, under the law of December 5, I94°- 84 The same law provides that 
appeals from civil or criminal sentences pronounced by French courts shall 
be referred to the Court of Appeals of Turin or to the Supreme Court of the 
Kingdom. The Italian rules for judicial proceedings are to be observed in 
regard to the form of processes before the courts of the Italian Kingdom. 
The reasons for this provision are to be found in the comparatively insignif¬ 
icant number of localities occupied by Italy, and the absence of higher judi¬ 
cial French authorities in the occupied area. 

The law of December 5, 194°. also empowered the military occupation 
authorities to extend Italian regulations concerning customs to the occupied 
territory in order to make them applicable to the traffic in goods across the 

new border line. , , , . . 

In the occupied zone the Italian lira was made legal tender m addition to 

the French franc by proclamation of June 21 , 1941” the rate of exchange 

being set at 100 francs to 38 lire. 

“upirfbJVuly and German,. above, eeclion on 

TI U&rbSi* l p A tr ima ” D ' V "'“' "“See betorv, P 

i 7 8 


Because the areas occupied by Italy were cut off from more important 
French administrative centers, difficulties arose in dealing with certain activ¬ 
ities normally administered under the direction of higher French authori¬ 
ties whose offices are outside the zone of occupation. Such a difficulty oc¬ 
curred, for example, with regard to the issuing of diplomas for graduates of 
schools in the occupied territory. Therefore, on May 22, 1941, 36 a proclama¬ 
tion was issued to the effect that such diplomas might be issued by the com¬ 
petent civil commissioner. 

IV. Vichy France * 


After the collapse of France, the political leaders who gathered around 
Marshal P6tain believed that they could restore the self-confidence of the 
French people by proclaiming a “national revolution” in political, social, 
economic, and even private life. The program of this “revolution” con¬ 
sisted mainly of such slogans as the strengthening of the executive power, the 
increase of production through proclaimed solidarity of the classes, a return 
to the land,—which amounts to stressing the social importance of agriculture, 
—the strengthening of the family unit, education of the youth in the na¬ 
tional spirit, and racialism, which resulted in the promulgation of anti- 
Jewish laws. Only the future historian will be able to determine to what 
extent these slogans are a product of the minds of the Vichy leaders and to 
what extent they have infiltrated French life through the channels of col¬ 
laboration with Germany. 36 ® 


On July 10, 1940, Albert Lebrun, President of the French Republic, pro¬ 
mulgated a constitutional law adopted by the National Assembly, to the 
effect that the National Assembly had vested in Marshal Retain all powers 
in the Government of the Republic and empowered him, as President of the 
Council of Ministers, to promulgate a new constitution. 1 1 was stressed that 
this future constitution should guarantee the rights of labor, of the family, 
and of the fatherland. 37 It was further stressed that the new constitution 
must be ratified by the nation and applied by “assemblies which it shall 
create,” i.e., by a new parliament. 


The Constitutional Law of July 10, 1940, provided for the creation of a 
new constitution by ‘‘one or several acts.” P6tain has chosen the second 

M See below, p. 403. 

38,1 The collaboration between Vichy France and Germany is a well-known fact anti there¬ 
fore will not be discussed here. 

a # 7 See below, p. 405. 



method. He has promulgated several constitutional acts, directed mainly 
to the strengthening of the authority of the Chief of State and to the aboli¬ 
tion of the representative element in government. 

By Constitutional Act No. I , 38 P&tain declared that he assumed “the 
functions of Chief of the French State.” In the same act he abrogated 
Article 2 of the Constitutional Law of February 25, 1875, which provided 
that the President of the Republic should be chosen by a National Assembly 
composed of the Senate and Chamber of Deputies. 

By Constitutional Act No. 2 of July n, i 94 °. 39 P^tain assumed sweeping 
powers, not only in the executive branch of the government, but also in the 
legislative branch. The provisions of the French law of 1875 that “ministers 
shall be collectively responsible to the chambers for the general policy of the 
government, and individually for their personal acts” were made void by the 
provision that ministers and state secretaries shall be responsible only to 
the Chief of the French State. Moreover, by the above-mentioned law, the 
Chief of State assumed legislative power, which he exercises in cooperation 
with the Council of Ministers only; he also promulgates the laws, and may 
negotiate and ratify treaties. He may not, however, declare war without the 
previous consent of the legislative assemblies. 

Fl)HRER principle 

To a certain extent, an imitation of the Fiihrer principle was introduced by 
Constitutional Act No. 7. 40 P6tain has introduced the element of personal 
leadership, not only in relation to the state but also in relation to officials, 
especially those of higher rank. Under the above-mentioned act, these 
officials must swear allegiance to the person of the Chief of State, and they 
are made personally responsible to him. This responsibility—a responsi¬ 
bility which, in the language of the act, “shall apply to their person and their 
property is implemented by the Chief of State himself, who may institute 
inquiries concerning any breach of faith on the part of such officials "by 
means of a procedure upon which he shall decide.” He may require them to 
make reparations and may also impose such penalties as "loss of political 
rights; surveillance of residence in France or in the Colonies; administrative 
internment; detention in a fortress. 

The elements of personal leadership and authoritarian doctrine are in a 
sense emphasized by the fact that the provision as to the imposition of penal¬ 
ties by the Chief of State for breach of faith in personal allegiance to him is 
superimposed upon the normal machinery of prosecution and punishment; 
for the same act provides that persons upon whom such penalties have been 
imposed may also be punished "under normal judicial procedure" for crimes 
or offenses which may have been committed by them. 

« See below, p. 405. 38 See below, p. 406. 

« Act of January 27, 194*. below, p. 406. 




As mentioned above, the Constitutional Law of July io, 1940, mentions 
the Assemblies which the proposed new constitutional document was to 
create, and Constitutional Act No. 3 of July 11, i 94 °> 41 states that the present 
Senate and Chamber of Deputies “shall continue to exist until the Assemblies 
anticipated by the Constitutional Law of July 10, 1940, have been formed.” 

On January 22, 1941, Pfetain promulgated a law creating a National Coun¬ 
cil. 42 Under this law the Council was to be composed of members appointed 
by the Chief of State from among representatives of the different legislative 
assemblies of the departments, municipalities, and professions, and from 
among “other competent persons or persons who have rendered special 
services to the state.” The sessions are non-public. They are called only 
for the purpose of expressing opinions on matters submitted to the Council 
by the Chief of State. Obviously the National Council, as conceived by the 
law of January 22, 1941, cannot be considered as a parliamentary institution 
representing the French nation. 

On August 25, 1942, 43 P£tain promulgated another law, by which the 
bureaus of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate were abolished as of 
August 31, 1942. Thus, the Parliament of France, an institution in which 
throughout French history the people had taken great pride, has been for¬ 
mally eliminated from the public life of France. 


From the beginning the new regime fixed its attention on the problem 
of dealing with political opponents. Since the persons who left France 
without permission after the collapse were treated as adversaries of P6tain, a 
decree was signed on July 23, 1940, to the effect that property of Frenchmen 
who, without authority, had fled the country between May 10 and June 30, 
1940, might be confiscated and their citizenship withdrawn. 44 In addition, 
P6tain has instituted criminal proceedings against members of former govern¬ 
ments, the purpose of this procedure being, on the one hand, to destroy 
political opponents, and, on the other hand, to create the feeling in the future 
that the disaster which befell France was due only to the machinations and 
mistakes of its political leaders. Germany, too, was interested in the re¬ 
moval of French statesmen who were opposed to Hitler. 

To this end a special Supreme Court of Justice—to be seated in Riom from 
August 8, 1940—was established by act of August 1, 1940. 45 The act es¬ 
pecially states that the court shall try persons who have committed offenses 
or have violated their duties “by acts which contributed to passing from a 
state of peace to a state of war before September 4, 1939* and also those 

41 Journal officiel, 1940, No. 168. 41 Ibid., 194L No. 24. 

43 Journal officiel dc l'Etatfran$ais, 1942, No. 204. 

44 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVII, No. 16 (August 10, 1940), p. 1030. 

46 Journal officiel, 1940, No. 189. 



persons who later on have aggravated the consequences of the situation thus 

Such a formulation of criminal responsibility represents ex-post-facto 
legislation and is a violation of well-recognized principles of criminal law. 


The principles of the corporative system were laid down in a report by 
Admiral Darlan, Vice President of the Council of Ministers, 46 which served 
as a preamble to the law of October 4, 1941, concerning the social organiza¬ 
tion of occupations. In this report it was stated that solidarity between 
workers and industrialists should supplant the old system of struggle of 
classes. In order to further the national interests, the report continued, 
members of occupational groups should collaborate closely among themselves 
and with other professional groups. 

The law of October 4, 1941, 47 created several new institutions for the 
enforcement of these principles. The most important among them are: 
industrial or commercial “families,” occupational unions, social committees 
for enterprises and for occupational families, and labor tribunals. 

Occupational families are composed of members of various industries and 
trades. Practically speaking, all French economic activities are to be di¬ 
vided into large “occupational families,” every occupational family repre¬ 
senting a separate branch of economic activity. A separate organization 
is to be established for each of these occupational families and also, if neces¬ 
sary, for every industry and occupation within the framework of the oc¬ 
cupational family. In accordance with the provisions of the above law, 
various occupational families have already been established, such, for ex¬ 
ample, as an occupational family for the chemical industry, 48 for buildings 
anti public works, 48 for insurance, 50 for banking, finance and exchange, 51 
and so on. 52 

The occupational family comprises, then, every person engaged in a given 
economic occupation, irrespective of his particular r6le and position, each 
occupational family comprising both employers and employees. Thus the 
element of economic solidarity in production is stressed. According to the 
above-mentioned law of October 4. 194*. thc occupational families have as 
their purpose "joint administration of the occupational interests of their 

”7 94 See^ateo “'The French Labour Charter,” International Labour Review 

(Mo^rea > l < : FnternationapL^ibour Office), Vol. XLV. No. 3 (March. ,942). pp. 269 ff. 

« J rZ nal ° fiUd ' MarCh » 7 W 4 2 ' Junq 4, 1942. “ ^id. 

« The following will give an idea as to the framework of an occupational family: “The 
occupational family for the manufacture of textiles and similar industries comprises the 
Sheaving or manufacture, finishing and dyeing of yarn, cloth, textiles, knitwear and 
spinning, w k nroduction of artificial fibres, and the trades supplying the mdus- 

trie*» ”_“Establishment of Occupational ‘Families’ under the Labour Charter, Interna ,- 

tional Labour Review, Vol. XLVI, No. 3 (September, 1942). P- 329. 



members of every category and . . . contribution to the support of the 
national economy in accordance with directions given by the public authori¬ 

Occupational unions (syndicats professionnels) are reminiscent to a certain 
extent of the former class organization in economic life because they are 
organized according to different categories of members: (i) employers, (2) 
workers, (3) clerical staff, (4) foremen, (5) engineers and administrative and 
commercial personnel. A single occupational union is to be formed in each 
area for each occupation, industry, or occupational family and for each 
category of members. Since the occupational union bears traces of class 
distinction, its r 61 e has been made less important and is mainly reduced to 
technical matters, such as enlistment and representation of its members, 
execution of corporative decisions, study of occupational questions, and the 
solving of problems affecting the members of its territorial unit. Any 
activity of a political or religious nature is expressly excluded. The local 
occupational unions are to be represented in regional occupational unions 
and the regional occupational unions in a national federation of occupational 

Social committees for enterprises are provided by Article 23 of the law, 
which requires that in every enterprise with a staff of not less than one hun¬ 
dred workers or employees, a Works Social Committee is to be created 
in order to ensure collaboration between employers and employees. Such 
a committee is to be composed of the head of the enterprise and representa¬ 
tives of every category of personnel. The works social committee has no 
authority to interfere with the management and operation of the under¬ 
taking. Subject to this reservation, however, it has wide functions as re¬ 
gards advising the management concerning all questions affecting the life 
and the work of the staff, providing information on the social life of the 
staff and their families, and organizing mutual aid institutions. 

Social committees for occupational families or occupations are also provided 
by the same law. These social committees are local, regional, and national 
in character. Each local social committee consists of from twelve to twenty- 
four members, chosen from among the officers of the occupational union 
and divided into three equal groups: (1) employers, (2) workers and salaried 
employees, and (3) other categories. The regional and national social 
committees, like the local committees, are tripartite in character. The 
officers, however, are appointed. Through these appointments on a regional 
and national scale, the government keeps control of and has an opportunity 
to shape the policy of the social committees. The functions of social 
committees are twofold, occupational and social. Political and religious 
questions are excluded. In the occupational field, they deal with wages, 
collective agreements, vocational training, trade practices, and so on; in 
the social field, with social security and employment, mutual aid, improve- 



ment of living conditions, sport, recreation, and so on. The local social 
committees control the works social committees of the enterprises. 

Labor disputes are to be settled, first of all, by the occupational bodies of 
the respective groups. If it is found impossible to avoid such disputes or 
to settle them by this means, then the differences should be submitted to 
conciliation boards, or, if they do not exist, to justices of the peace, “if 
individual differences are involved”; but if the differences are of a collective 
character, then labor tribunals shall decide the case. These labor tribunals 
are of two kinds, regional and national. Regional tribunals are composed 
of two judges—of whom one shall exercise the functions of the president 
and of three members of the regional social committee. Appeals from deci¬ 
sions of regional labor tribunals shall be submitted to a national labor tribunal, 
which shall render final decisions. 


Labor has become one of the main concerns of the Vichy regime for two 
reasons: It was believed, first, that an increased production, especially in 
agriculture, might help to solve the economic crisis; and secondly, the Ger¬ 
mans have made constant demands on French labor, to be engaged for work 
in Germany. 

In this, atmosphere, labor efficiency became of paramount importance. 
In order to foster this efficiency, a National Order of Labor was created, con¬ 
ferring distinction upon persons who display “ unusual technical ability in 
the exercise of their occupation, a high sense of responsibility to the com¬ 
munity, or a particular and sustained devotion to the occupation and the 

nation.” 63 

On September 4, 1942, M a government decree was promulgated relative to 
the utilization and organization of labor. Labor compulsion was introduced 
for males between 18 and 50 years of age and for unmarried persons of the 
female sex between the ages of 21 and 35 - Any dismissal of labor or any can¬ 
cellation of a labor contract, without previous authorization of labor inspec¬ 
tion services, was forbidden in all industrial and commercial enterprises. 
Every Frenchman between 18 and 50 years of age “whose physical quali¬ 
fication has been medically recognized” must be able to prove that he is 
engaged in work useful to the country. Any person from the above category 
who cannot furnish such proof may be subject to employment on any work 
designated by the Secretary of State for Labor. By this law an obligation 
was imposed upon employers to provide technical and professional educa¬ 
tional facilities in order to create a skilled manpower for those professions 
which lack labor. Severe penalties were introduced for violating the law, 

U See Law No. 439 of April I, 1942. below, p. 4 U* 
m Journal official 1942. P- 3122 See also New iork 
6; p. 4, cols. 5-6, 6-8 (text of law). 

Times, .September 14, 1942, p. i.col. 



namely, imprisonment up to five years and fines up to 30,000 francs. These 
punishments may be doubled in case of repetition of such violations. 

1 he law of October 4, 1941, concerning the social organization of occupa¬ 
tions envisages an organization in which all persons engaged in economic 
activities are to form a pyramid of different groups, controlled and checked 
one by another (in particular, the employees are checked and controlled by 
the employers), and then controlled at the pinnacle by the state. Labor in 
this pyramid has a clearly subordinate role. The decrees on mobilization 
of labor stress even more this subordinate role, which makes it impossible for 
the workers to defend themselves against the well-established Vichy policy 
of trading in French labor with Germany. 



On October 28, 1940, at 3:00 a.m., an ultimatum was handed hy the Pahan 
Minister to the Prime Minister of Greece in which demand madeby Ita y 
of the right to occupy certain strategic points of »ree ern * • 

for the expiration of the ultimatum was set for six o c oc ie St 1 , ' i 

Early in the same morning the Italians started the attac agains le 
The campaign against Greece was not successful in 1940, u j ls * 
ful in 1941, when Germany joined in the attack. During 110 a o 
operations Bulgaria joined the Axis, and as a result of this common ac 
Greece was occupied by Italy, Albania, Bulgaria, and Germany, an was 
vided into four zones of occupation. The Bulgarians were & 1VC ^ es e 
Thrace (Aegean region), Eastern Macedonia up to the Struma iv ^ r » 
the islands of Thasos and Samothrace. The Germans occupie ra 

Macedonia, including Salonika, parts of the Aegean region, and t ie ib an b o 
Lemnos, Mytilene, and Chios. In addition the Germans supervised ana 
gave instructions to the Greek Governor of the province of Evros near tne 
frontier of European Turkey. The Italians occupied the remainder ot ie 
country and most of the islands, including a small part of Crete, which, how¬ 
ever, was in greater part occupied by Germany. . The Albanians were a 
lowed to occupy the provinces of Yanina, Thesprotia, and renza, an area o 

7,821 square kilometers, with a population of 3 ot> . 573 - . . 

Whereas the Bulgarian zone of occupation was relatively more sta¬ 
bilized, there were frequent changes irwthe zones occupied by Germany an a 
Italy. Thus, when it seemed that the military situation in Greece was well 
in hand and German troops were required for the Russian front, the Ita lan 
zone of occupation was extended. During this extension the German zone 
was limited principally to strategic points such as ports, communication lines 
and airdromes.* But when the military situation in this section deteriorated 
because of guerrilla warfare and the menace of an Al 1 ted invasion, the Germans 
took under their control more and more territories. Finally, after the collapse 
of Italy in the summer of 1943 . Germany took over control of the areas previ¬ 
ously occupied by Italy. The Bulgarian occupation area was also extended. 

I. Italian Occupation 


On Italy’s occupation of Greece, a special Office of Civil Affairs was es¬ 
tablished on the staff of the High Commander of the Troops in Albania. 

* Italy’s Aggression against Greece (Royal Ministry for Foreign, Athens, 1940), 

PP i BMetin of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 15 (July 26, 194O, P- 9«6. 




The first orders on military occupation were issued by the commanding 
general of the troops in Albania. The proclamation of October 28, 1940, 4 
states that the Office for Civil Affairs is to coordinate civilian services and 
exercise the necessary control over them. The Royal Carabinieri were 
called on to play an essential role in the administration of the territories in 
the initial stages of the occupation. They took over the enforcement of the 
orders and the supervision of the local police. The occupied territory was 
completely shut off from Albanian territory and only with the permission 
of the Royal Carabinieri could persons enter the occupied zone. 

In 1941, when all Greek territory had been occupied by the Axis, the 
office of High Commissioner was established for the civil administration of 
the territory of the Greek peninsula occupied by units attached to the High 
Command of the Troops in Albania. The functions of the High Commis¬ 
sioner are fixed by the proclamation of the Duce of July 2, 1941. 5 Accord¬ 
ing to this proclamation, the High Commissioner is the highest civil author¬ 
ity of that part of the Greek peninsula occupied by Italian forces. He is 
appointed and recalled by order of the Supreme Military Command, and 
is responsible to that command, although a provision is also included accord¬ 
ing to which the Supreme Command may specify that the High Commis¬ 
sioner, in the exercise of particular powers or of all his powers, shall be re¬ 
sponsible to the High Command of the Armed Forces in Albania. The order 
also conferred upon the High Commissioner the right to replace local offi¬ 
cials and to make new appointments. The area under Italian occupation is 
divided into civil commissariats with Italian civil commissioners at the head. 



In economic matters not only the Royal Carabinieri but also the Royal 
Finance Guards had jurisdiction. It was required under the proclamation 
of the commanding general of October 30, 1940,' 5 that persons among the lo¬ 
cal population in the occupied territory owning flour, macaroni products, 
vegetables, barley, wheat and fodder, beef, poultry, goats, and pigs must 
make and submit an inventory thereof to the Royal Carabinieri or the Royal 
Finance Guards. The proclamation stated that failure to make such a re¬ 
port or the making of an incorrect report would be punished by arrest and a 
sentence of from six months to two years, and that the unreported produce 
would be sequestrated. The same proclamation introduced penalties of 
imprisonment up to fifteen years for the destruction, damaging, or spoiling 
of food products, fodder, building or fire wood, coal or peat, gasoline, and 
other articles of prime necessity to the civilian population or useful to the 
occupying army. The occupant took over the Greek monopoly services for 
salt, tobacco, matches, cigarette boxes, automatic lighters and flints. 7 

4 See Proclamation No. 10, below, p. 412. & See below, p. 4 * 5 * 

“See below, p. 413. 7 See proclamation of May 4, 1941, below, p. 414. 


i8 7 


In the Italian-held areas the Italian lira and Albanian franc were intro¬ 
duced as an additional currency by the proclamation of the Duce of June 
2i I94 i. According to this order 100 drachmae are to be equivalent to 12.50 
lire and to 2 Albanian francs. 8 Later on the Italians issued the liretta in the 
Ionian Islands and the Mediterranean drachmae on the mainland of Gieece. 9 


As horses, mules, and donkeys are considered a necessary means of 
transportation in the mountainous regions, especially severe penalties (im¬ 
prisonment of from one to five years) were fixed for killing such animals or so 
harming them as to render them unfit for further use. The damaging and 
destroying of vehicles of any kind, including wagons or carts, was made 
punishable by imprisonment of from six months to three years. 1 

On October 29, 1940, 11 the commanding general issued an order which was 
directed mainly against landing planes. According to this order any person 
with knowledge of the landing of enemy planes in occupied territory was re¬ 
quired to give immediate notice thereof to the Royal Carabinieri or to other 
authorities. The same applied to crashing planes. 

The fortunes of all Greek army officers who have left the country have 
been confiscated and their families exiled to remote parts of Greece. 

II. Bulgarian Occupation 

Bulgaria has annexed Eastern Macedonia, Thrace (Aegean region), and 
Samothrace, this territory comprising 16,682 square kilometers and including 
the provinces of Serrai, Drama, Cavalla, and Rhodope. Thus Bulgaria aug¬ 
mented its population by about 590,000 as a result of the annexation of Greek 
territory. 13 The Bulgarians claim that the Aegean is necessary for their liv¬ 
ing space; the seacoast especially is supposed to be necessary for their over¬ 
seas trade. 


The Greek administrative agencies were abolished and Bulgarian institu- 
tions introduced instead. The provincial administration of the occupied 

areas is headed by Bulgarian governors. 

For purposes of colonization special additional agencies were created: (1) 

» A?the'tTmeofcompleting this book the author does not possess any official text introduc- 

^ffiL CU No.Tof October 30, .940. below, p. 4.4. 

a WewT’^’l^XIX, No. 11 (May 30, 1942). P- 498 . 

1a Stephen G. Xydis, The Economy and Finances of Greece under Axis Occupation (Pitts¬ 
burgh, Pa., 1943), P- I0 - 



a regional director for colonization in every region; (2) a central committee 
for land grants (the activities of this committee are described below). 

The personnel of the administration was Bulgarized completely, a pro¬ 
cedure which follows the well-established Balkan pattern of changing all 
officials upon taking over new territories. This seems to be justified because 
of national antagonisms, which have always been rife in the Balkans. Dur¬ 
ing the present war former Greek officials have been replaced by Bulgarian 
officials to a larger extent than in any other occupied country in Europe, 
these replacements involving all grades, from the higher officials down to 
janitors. By thus replacing officials the Bulgarian occupant intended to 
achieve an additional goal, namely, to increase the numbers of the Bulgarian 
population in the occupied areas. The Bulgarian officials were summoned 
to come to Thrace with their families. If they brought their families along, 
they were entitled to receive land grants and dwelling-houses. The Council 
of Ministers, on October 9, 1942, 14 issued a decision establishing the conditions 
for granting lands and dwelling-houses to Bulgarian officials moving in from 
Bulgaria, such as mayors of villages, agents of the police, guards of the fields, 
janitors, and supervisors of breeding stations. According to this decision 
lands are not granted to unmarried officials or public servants who do not 
have families at the place of their employment nor are they granted to mar¬ 
ried functionaries whose families do not live at the place of their employ¬ 
ment. In order to induce public servants to live permanently in the Aegean 
region with their families, land and dwelling-houses are granted at the start 
only on a temporary basis. The temporary grant lasts up to the completion 
of three years’ uninterrupted service in the Aegean region. After the serv¬ 
ant has completed three years’ service, the grant becomes permanent. 


The policy pursued by the Bulgarian occupant in Eastern Macedonia was 
entirely different from the one adopted in the Aegean region. Whereas in 
Macedonia a policy of rehabilitation was followed, the Macedonians being 
considered by the occupant as of Bulgarian origin, “freed from the Greeks,” 
a real genocide policy was applied to the Greeks in the Aegean region. 
Greek churches and schools were closed and the Bulgarian language was 
made the official language. These measures aimed at changes in the com¬ 
position of the population in accordance with the German pattern. First of 
all, the Greeks who had come as immigrants from Anatolia and settled in 
Greece after the exchange of populations in 1922-23 were expelled from 
Thrace into that part of the Greek territory which was left under a Greek 
puppet government. 15 

14 Sec below, p. 416. 

w Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 18 (September 6, 1941), p. 1175. From 
Western Thrace, 80,000 Greeks were removed to the remaining territory of Greece, and 
25,000 to Old Bulgaria. Kulischer, op. cit., p. 115. 



Various other devices were also used in order to compel the Greeks to leave. 
Thus, a general licensing system for trades and professions was introduced. lfi 
No one could engage in trades who had not received a special license from the 
Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Trade. The refusal of such a license 
was equivalent to condemning the applicant to starvation. Again, the 
property of the wealthier classes was confiscated. 17 Furthermore, pre-inva¬ 
sion bank deposits were not returned to Greeks (see below). Consequently, 
many of the Greeks preferred to leave the territory rather than to starve. 
More than 100,000 Bulgarians have been brought from Bulgaria proper to 
Thrace for purposes of colonization, mainly in the areas between the Struma 
and Mesta rivers. 

In the autumn of 1942, a decree was issued whereby “all private estates 
indispensable for the building of residences for immigrants in the Aegean 
province are to be expropriated.” 18 The immigrant colonists in this region 
received credits, land, and dwelling-houses. The colonization and the 
granting of land and houses was handled by regional directors in the respec¬ 
tive regions and by a central committee for land grants. A deficiency budget 
of 12,000,000 leva was appropriated by the Sobranje (Parliament) for the 
construction and repair of dwelling-houses for colonists in the Aegean 
region. 19 


In accordance with the decision of the Council of Ministers of May 26, 
1941, 20 all private persons and firms with domicile and residence in territories 
occupied by the Bulgarian authorities heretofore belonging to Greece, 
namely, Western Thrace and Eastern Macedonia, were ordered to declare 
from June 6 to 19, 1941, in agencies of the Bulgarian National Bank or in 
branches of the Bulgarian Agricultural and Cooperative Bank all drachmae 
in their possession in bank notes of 100 drachmae and higher denominations. 
Declaration of bank notes of less than 100 drachmae denomination was not 
required. The drachma was declared invalid after June 19, I 94 x » anc * the 
deposits were to be changed into leva. Moreover, the Bulgarian National 
Bank was entrusted with the collection in leva or drachmae of the claims of 
the Greek Bank and the Greek National Bank against private persons and 
firms in Western Thrace and Eastern Macedonia. 

As to bank deposits dating from the pre-invasion period, the Bulgarian 
authorities in occupied Greece proceeded in the same way as in that part of 
Yugoslavia occupied by Bulgaria. The same decision of the Council of 
Ministers 11 settled the problem of bank deposits in both the Yugoslav and 

14 Xydis, op. cit., p. 19. v 

17 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XIX, No. 11 (May 30, 1942), p. 49$. 

13 Ibid., Vol. XX, No. 7 (April 3, 1943), P- 319 - , , 

13 36th Decision of the Council of Ministers, October 14, 1942, below, p. 4 * 7 - 

20 Decision No. 2012, below, “Yugoslavia," p. 633. .... 

21 No. 3121, August 1, 1941, Protocol No. 130. See below, “Yugoslavia, p. 635. 



Greek areas under Bulgarian occupation. According to this decision, all 
accounts existing and all amounts to be collected by the National Bank of 
Greece, the Bank of Greece, and the Agricultural Bank of Greece were to be 
centralized in the central account of the Ministry of Finance with the Sofia 
branch of the Bulgarian National Bank. Payments to depositors of the 
above-mentioned institutions could be made only to persons of Bulgarian 
origin who had not emigrated from these regions during the year 1941. 
Most of these payments, however, could take place only in instalments. 
Thus, for amounts up to 2,000 leva payment is permitted in full, but for 
amounts above 2,000 leva, the payments must be at the rate of only 2,000 
monthly. By this procedure the Greek population was deprived of all its 
bank deposits. 

III. German Occupation 

As mentioned above, the area of the German occupation has varied ac¬ 
cording to the military situation. Since the beginning of the invasion Ger¬ 
many has held under administration Central Macedonia, with the town of 
Salonika and the islands of Lemnos, Mytilene, and Chios. The Commander 
in Chief of the German Army in Greece has a special staff for civil adminis¬ 
tration. This staff acts through local military commands throughout all the 
occupied military area. The existing Greek authorities are supervised by 
German officers. 

Immediately after the occupation the Germans started to requisition all 
food and fruits. 22 A special arrangement was made for German soldiers to 
send air-mail packages of food to their homes. Food production since the 
beginning of the occupation has been directed toward the needs of the Ger¬ 
man war economy. For example, in May, 1942, all the milk production in 
this area was requisitioned in order to be transformed into cheese and 
butter to be sent to Germany. Fresh fruit was also requisitioned sometime 
later. 23 

One of the main problems of German administration consists in recruiting 
labor and preventing sabotage. All males between sixteen and fifty years 
of age are liable for labor conscription for work in Greece or for work in 
Germany. 21 Strikes and lockouts were outlawed and severe penalties threat¬ 
ened for resort thereto. Persons who organize and direct a strike are liable 
to the death penalty. Strikers, as well as saboteurs, are tried by military 
courts. For the prevention of sabotage the German occupant has resorted 
very widely to the practice of taking hostages. Following the sabotaging of 

71 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XIX, No. 3 (February 7, 1942), p. 118. 

23 Xydis, op. cil., p. 10. 

It was reported that German and Italian food controllers requisitioned foodstuffs in quan¬ 
tities far exceeding the needs of the army and sold the surplus at enormous prices. Bulletin 
of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 15 (July 26, 1941), pp. 986-87. 

u Xydis, op. cil., p. 20. 



the postal, telegraph, and telephone services, the Germans introduced the 
death penalty for retarding work. 25 

IV. The Area of the Greek Puppet Government 

The Greek mainland, Thessaly and the Peloponnesos, representing a total 
of 60,263 square kilometers, with a population of 3,546,185 people, is admin¬ 
istered by a Greek puppet government, which was established by the Axis in 
Athens and was controlled by them. 

Administration . Ostensibly the former ministries are functioning. A 
special German plenipotentiary and also an Italian plenipotentiary maintain 
their offices in Athens, however, where they act as representatives of the 
Reich and of Italy to the Greek puppet government. A considerable author¬ 
ity is concentrated in the person of the Minister of Finance, who is a kind of 
economic dictator, having control over the ministries of Agriculture, Food, 
and Labor. The Minister of Finance has the right to supervise these minis¬ 
tries, to determine their jurisdiction and control their services, to create or 
abolish positions, and to supervise trade, supplies, prices, and rationing. 
Even the so-called “soup kitchens” are within his jurisdiction. 

Finance. More than any other country Greece has been stricken by infla¬ 
tion. The volume of currency has risen from 6,721 million drachmae on 
January I, 1938, to 110,000 million drachmae on August 15, 1942. 26 The 
reason is the unchecked printing of currency by the Greek National Bank, 
which was put under the dual control of two commissioners; one being Herr 
Hahn, sent to Athens by the Reichsbank; the other Signor Forte, from the 
Banca d’ltalia. 1 Under the pressure of these two commissioners the volume 
of the currency was further expanded in order to meet currency requirements 
of the German and Italian armies. 

Barter. Although price regulations have been enacted, they cannot in 
practice fulfill their purpose because of the complete disintegration of the 
currency and the pressure of the black market. Therefore in some instances 
currency has practically ceased to fulfill its mission of being a measure of 
value. Goods are exchanged against goods and even government officials are 
paid sometimes in goods, especially in food provided them by the soup 
kitchens. Some taxes are paid by farmers in agricultural products. 

When requisitions fail, the Axis authorities exchange manufactured ob¬ 
jects for agricultural products of the farmers. 28 

Feeding the Population. In view of the particularly bad food situation in 
Greece, the United Nations agreed to make an exception with respect to the 
blockade and to send food to Greece, with the cooperation of the Swedish 

25 Bulletin of International News, Vol. XIX, No. 10 (May 16, 1942), p. 455. 

28 Xydis, op. cit., p. 9. 

27 Free Europe, Vol. 4, No. 53 (November 14, 1941), P- 274. 28 Xydis, op. cit., p. 15. 



A considerable r61e in feeding the population is played by the soup kitch¬ 
ens, which hand out food to the population on the streets. As mentioned 
above, the soup kitchens are under the Ministry of Finance and they are 
handled by a Central Soup Kitchen Committee. 29 Soup kitchens are dis¬ 
persed throughout all the country. Various professions or groups, such as 
government employees, bank employees, and students, have their own soup 

* 9 Xytlis, op. cit., p. 13. 





On May io, 1940, the Germans crossed the frontiers of the Grand Duchy 
of Luxemburg. 1 When the government was forced to leave the country, an 
Administrative Commission was set up by a number of government officials 
for the purpose of establishing order and for carrying on current administra¬ 
tive affairs. After a short time, however, this Administrative Commission 
was abolished by the German occupant. 

Immediately after the occupation, a German Feldkommandantur , and 
shortly afterward an Oberfeldkommandantur , took over the administration of 
Luxemburg. Early in August, 1940, the office of a $tadtkommandantur was 
established. On August 7, 1940, a German Civil Administration was set up 
in the Grand Duchy and the District Leader {Gauleiter) of Koblenz-Trier 
(Gustav Simon) was appointed its chief. 2 On August 30, 1942, it was an¬ 
nounced by the Gauleiter that Luxemburg had been incorporated into the 
German District of Mosel land. 

Since the beginning of the occupation local institutions of administration 
and communal life have been gradually abolished and replaced by German 
institutions. The Chamber of Deputies and the Council of State estab¬ 
lished under the Constitution of Luxemburg of October 17, 1868, were dis¬ 
solved. 3 The German Municipal Code of January 30, 1935, was intro¬ 
duced.' 1 As that Code is based upon the principle of leadership ( Fiihrer - 
prinzip), the Luxemburg form of elective government was abolished, and 
municipalities are now headed by mayors and aldermen, who are not elected 
by the population but appointed by the German authorities. The Mayor 
constitutes the local police authority. Communities are divided into (1) 
municipal districts, headed by mayors, and (2) county districts, headed by 
county chiefs. The mayors and county chiefs are supervised by the Chief 
of the German Civil Administration. 


An order was published on January 15, 1941, 8 placing the National 
Socialist Party under special protection. By this order persons who voice 
utterances against the German Reich and the National Socialist Party and 

1 Bulletin of International News , Vol. XVII, No. 10 (May 18, 1940), p. 622. 

2 The Luxembourg Grey Book — Luxembourg and the German Invasion Before and After. 
Rased upon Official Documents, with a Preface by M. Joseph Bech, Foreign Minister of the 
Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg (London: Hutchinson & Co., Ltd. [1942)), p. 54. 

3 Ibid., pp. 18, 54. 4 Order of November 14, 1940, below, p. 420. 

6 See below, p. 425. 

193 ' 



its leading personalities—even though not made in public—also are punish¬ 
able. Not only deliberately malicious but also careless statements of this 
character render the speaker liable to penalties; it is sufficient that the judge 
shall find that the person involved has been guilty of negligence. Legal 
insecurity is augmented by the provision that prosecution under this law 
shall be subject to the consent of the Chief of the Civil Administration. 

The main instrumentality of Germanism, aside from the Civil Administra¬ 
tion, is the National German Party ( Volks-Deutsche Bewegung ).• Only 
persons who have joined this party are considered as being willing to pro¬ 
mote Germanism and as such they are privileged. 


The Supreme Court of Luxemburg has been abolished and its functions 
assigned to chambers of the Provincial Court of Appeals. 7 The courts have 
been Germanized, and a German Special Court (Criminal Court) has been 
established in Luxemburg with very broad jurisdiction over matters sup¬ 
posedly opposed to German interests, ranging from gatherings in the streets 
to ceasing work in factories. Moreover, the German prosecuting attorney 
may always send any case to the Special Court by removing it from the 
jurisdiction of the local courts. This court has created an atmosphere of 
legal insecurity in the country, because the jurisdiction is vague and the 
penalties not adjusted to specific offenses. These penalties are severe, 
ranging from fine and imprisonment to hard labor and even death. 


Not only the judicial system, but also the bar, was Germanized. In 
order to make Luxemburg barristers comply with the New Order, a Special 
Honor Court ( Ehrengericht ) for practising attorneys was established. 8 The 
jurisdiction of this court is practically unlimited and is formulated in the 
following manner: “The Special Honor Court shall have jurisdiction to try 
acts which constitute a violation of the duties arising from the organization 
of a German administration in Luxemburg/* The agent initiating pro¬ 
ceedings before the Special Honor Court is the Chief of the Civil Administra¬ 
tion himself. The jurisdiction being vague and undefined, as in the case of 
the Special Court, the Chief of the Civil Administration has thus practically 
unlimited authority over the bar in Luxemburg. He alone may determine 
what constitutes a “violation of the duties arising from the organization of a 
German administration in Luxemburg/* The aim of the above-mentioned 
order is to break the resistance of the Luxemburg Bar, to make its mem- 

8 “The Luxembourg Professor Kratzenberg—himself of German origin—was made 
leader of the Volks-Deutsche Beivegung” — Luxembourg Grey Book , p. 55. 

7 Order of November 9, 1940, below, p. 423. 

8 Order of February' 12, 1941, below, p. 427. 

On the continent of Europe “honor courts" for attorneys usually deal with matters in¬ 
volving professional activities of the bar. 



bers subservient to the German administration, and to deprive the per¬ 
secuted Luxemburg population of its natural legal protectors 9 and intellectual 


The economy of Luxemburg was organized according to the principle of 
economic totalitarianism, e.g., the grouping of all persons and enterprises 
involved in economic activities into professional and regional organizations 
controlled by the central authority of the Chief of the Civil Administration. 10 
Participation in economic life and the right to work and to own property are 
made dependent upon the willingness of the person concerned to promote 
Germanism in Luxemburg. According to the decree of February 2 r, 1941, 11 
the Chief of the Civil Administration may restrain managers of enterprises 
from their activities if they are not willing to “promote Germanism at all 
times without any reservations,*’ or if they violate duties “arising from the 
general principles of a National Socialist Labor Community (. Arbeitsgemein - 
schaft ).” All measures undertaken by the occupant in Luxemburg show 
but one aim, namely, the destruction of the Luxemburg nationhood and the 
promotion of Germanism. 


When the German Army occupied Luxemburg, it was provided with 
Reich Credit Institute notes (Reichskreditkassenscheine) , which the popula¬ 
tion were compelled to accept in payment for goods purchased by members 
of the army. By order of August 26, 1940, 12 the Reichsmark was introduced 
as additional legal tender in Luxemburg. However, on January 29, 1941, 13 
the Reichsmark was made exclusive legal tender. Luxemburg francs, as 
well as Belgian francs 14 and Reich Credit Institute notes, were withdrawn 
and exchanged for Reichsmarks. This exchange procedure was closed on 
March 1, 1941, the rate of exchange being established as follows: 1 Belgian 
franc equals 0.08 Reichsmark; 1 Luxemburg franc equals o. 10 Reichsmark. 
After the above date Luxemburg and Belgian francs were considered as 
foreign exchange. Claims for Belgian and Luxemburg francs by residents 
of Luxemburg, Alsace-Lorraine, the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, 
and the Greater German Reich on other residents had to be changed into 
claims for Reichsmarks. Thus Luxemburg was completely incorporated 
into the Reichsmark area. 

8 The Luxemburg Bar displays an especially stubborn attitude toward the German Ad¬ 
ministration. According to the Luxembourg Grey Book (pp. 63-64): “All the members of 
the Luxembourg Bar who had, up till May 23rd, 1941, refused to associate themselves 
with the activities carried out by the Germans against the independence and the Constitu¬ 
tion of the Grand-Duchy were condemned to forced labour. 

10 See order of November 12, 1940, below, p. 43 *• 

11 See below, p. 433. 12 See below, p. 434- 13 See below, p. 435. 

14 Belgian francs, as well as Luxemburg francs, were legal tender in the Grand Duchy. — 
Annuaire OJJiciel (Luxemburg, 194°). P- 20 ^» P ar - c - 



By the proclamation of September 13, 1940, 16 all residents of Luxemburg 
were required to sell their United States of America dollar notes, Swiss francs, 
Swedish crown notes, French franc notes, gold coins, and gold, pure and un¬ 
alloyed, to the German authorities acting through specified banks. In 
addition, claims in foreign and home currency against non-residents were 
subject to registration. 


The manpower of Luxemburg was mobilized for German purposes through 
workbooks issued by the Labor Office in Luxemburg. 16 By order of Febru¬ 
ary 12, 1941, 17 youths and girls were compelled to enter the Reich Labor 
Service. Originally they were required to work within the District of 
Moselland, of which Luxemburg is a part, but later on they were sent to 
work in Germany. 


The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg has been for centuries bilingual (French 
and German). Nevertheless, the Chief of the German Civil Administration 
on August 6, 1940, 18 issued an order in which he stated that “the language 
of Luxemburg and of its inhabitants is, and always has been, German. . . , 19 
The German language shall be the exclusive official language,” as well as 
the language in commercial life. All names of streets and localities were 
made German. 20 Luxemburgers having non-German first names were 
required to assume in lieu thereof the corresponding German first name, or, 
if that were impossible, to select a German first name. Nationals of 
Luxemburg having a family name of German origin which later had been 
given a foreign or non-German form were required to resume the original 
German form. If the person involved did not apply for a change of name 
before February 15, 1941, the occupant himself conferred a German name 
upon him. 21 

An order was issued in Luxemburg concerning legitimation of illegitimate 
children, in which it was declared that an illegitimate child shall, in relation 
to its mother or her relatives, have the legal status of a legitimate child. 28 

16 See below, p. 434. ,ft See order of September 30, 1940, below, p. 436. 

17 See below, p. 437. IS See below, p. 440. 

19 Since the earliest days of Luxemburg's national existence both languages have been 
spoken. Charters written in Latin after the thirteenth century were later generally worded 
in French. Only seventy charters were written in German, while more than 280 were drawn 
up in French. Because of affinity with French culture, the French language was the official 
language of the country. The population also speaks “Letzeburgesch,” a homely dialect 
based on Teutonic origins, with extensive borrowings from Celtic, Roman, and French. 
Neither Germans nor Frenchmen understand the Luxemburg dialect. Therefore, the 
statement of the Chief of the Civil Administration of Luxemburg to the effect that German 
has always been the language of Luxemburg is untrue. French had always remained the 
official legislative, administrative, and judicial language. — Luxembourg Grey Book, p. 24. 

20 See above, chapter on “Genocide.” 21 Order of January 31, 1941, below, p. 441. 

22 See order of March 22, 1941, below, p. 428. 



Although this provision does not expressly mention German fathers, one 
may infer by comparison with other genocide laws issued by the occupant 23 
that the order had as a goal the procreation of children by German fathers. 24 


Despite oppression, however, the Luxemburg people remain faithful to 
their country and nationhood. During the census of population on October 
10, 1941, ordered by the occupant, forms to be filled in and signed contained 
the usual entries—surnames, Christian names, age, nationality, language. 
A special order was issued to the effect that where German nationhood did 
not apply, foreign nationhood, such as Italian or French, could be indicated, 
but in no case could Luxemburg nationhood be admitted. The Luxemburg 
language was excluded under the pretext that the Luxemburg dialect was 
only a branch of the German language. In spite of these orders, however, 
96 per cent of the population in towns and 99 per cent in the country stated 
their nationality to be that of Luxemburg and their native language to be 
Luxemburgisch. 25 

23 See above, chapter on “Genocide/' 

24 See the speech of Adolf A. Berle, Jr., at the reception held at the Luxemburg Legation 
in August, 1941, as quoted in the Luxembourg Grey Book , p. 50: “A conqueror, claiming to 
establish a ‘new order,’ has put its young men at forced labour; and has taken its girls from 
their homes, has forced them into German industry, and proposes to make them, if pos¬ 
sible, mothers of alien children.” 

25 Luxembourg Grey Book , p. 57. 




Under Article 99 of the Treaty of Versailles, Germany renounced in favor 
of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers the port of Memel, with a small 
territory surrounding it. 

Upon the ratification of the treaty, the Allies occupied and administered 
this territory for three years. Meanwhile, the suggestion had been made 
that Memel might be given a status in regard to Lithuania similar to that 
which had been accorded Danzig in relation to Poland. The administration 
of Memel was in the hands of a French High Commissioner, with the old 
German Direktorium retained as the executive organ, 1 which, according to 
Lithuanian claims, pursued a policy hostile to the Lithuanians. On January 
9, 1923, the Lithuanians seized Memel by a surprise attack. 2 After nego¬ 
tiations between the Lithuanian Government and the Conference of Ambas¬ 
sadors, and action taken by the League of Nations, a convention was signed 
in Paris on May 8, 1924, between Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan, 
on the one side, and Lithuania on the other, by the terms of which Memel 
Territory was placed under the sovereignty of Lithuania. An annex was 
attached to the convention constituting the statute for Memel Territory, 
which provided that Memel was to enjoy “legislative, judicial, adminis¬ 
trative and financial autonomy” within the limits prescribed in the statute, 
with a governor appointed by the President of the Lithuanian Republic. 
In a second annex to the convention the port of Memel was described “as a 
port of international concern,” to which recommendations adopted by the 
Barcelona Conference of 1921 should apply, and it was placed under a Har¬ 
bor Board, which was to include among its members a technical expert of 
neutral nationality appointed by the League of Nations. 3 


In the atmosphere of international terror created after the sudden occupa¬ 
tion and dismemberment of Czechoslovakia by Germany, Hitler made a 
request to the Lithuanian Government that it cede Memel to Germany. 

1 The Question of Memel. Diplomatic and Other Documents . . . (1919-1923), (London: 
Lithuanian Information Bureau, 1924), pp. 7-8, 43. 

2 Ibid., p. 8. 

1 Convention and Transitory Provision concerning Memel, signed at Paris , May 8th, 1924. 
Extract No. 28 from the League of Nations Official Journal (Geneva, 1924), pp. 2, 5, 10, 11. 
See also Jacob Robinson, Kommentar der Konvcnlion fiber das Memelgebiet vomS. Mai, 1924 
(Kaunas, 1934), 2 vols.; League of Nations, Treaty Series , Vol. 29, p. 85. 




Lithuania complied with this request, and on March 22, 1939, a treaty was 
signed with Germany regarding the cession of this territory. 4 

On March 23, Hitler arrived in Memel on board the battleship Deutsch¬ 
land , and the whole of the German Baltic fleet entered the harbor. In a 
speech in the city Hitler thanked the Memellanders for their loyalty during 
the separation from Germany, and among other remarks spoke as follows: 
“We know what we have to expect from another part of the world. We 
have no intention of imposing suffering on that other world, but merely of 
making good the suffering which it has imposed on us, and I believe that 
to a great extent we have come to the end of this unique reparation.” 5 

Aboard the Deutschland , Hitler signed the “law concerning the reunion of 
Memelland with the German Reich.” 6 Under the terms of this law, Memel 
Territory was incorporated into the German Reich and included within the 
province of East Prussia, namely, in the district of Gumbinnen. Inhabitants 
of Memelland were declared German citizens if they were German citizens 
on July 30, 1924, and if on March 22, 1939, they had their domicile in the 
territory of Memel or in the German Reich. According to this law, the whole 
body of German law, and also Prussian law, was to be enforced in Memel 
Territory as from May 1, 1939, with such exceptions as the proper German 
ministers might decide. The Reich Minister of the Interior was authorized 
to carry out the incorporation. 

On March 23, 1939, a decree was published by which the Reichsmark was 
made legal tender and Lithuanian currency was replaced by the Reichsmark 
at the rate of 1 Lithuanian lit to 40 Reichspfennigs. 7 

4 Reichsgesetzblatt , 1939, II, p. 608. 

5 Bulletin of International News , Vol. XVI, No. 7 (April 6, 1939), p. 348. 

0 See below, p. 444. 7 See below, p. 445. 




On the occupation of the Netherlands after a short but stubborn fight, 
Germany took over the administration of the country. Hitler appointed 
a Reich Commissioner in the person of Seyss-Inquart, the same individual 
who, as a member of the last “Austrian Government,” had invited Hitler 
to “protect” Austria against internal disorders. 1 The Reich Commissioner 
was made responsible directly to Hitler. 

In his first proclamation to the Netherlands population, the Reich 
Commissioner stated that as a result of “the magnanimity of the Fuhrer 
and the power of the German armed forces,” an order of public life had been 
restored within a few days “after the catastrophe brought about by the 
former leadership of the Netherlands.” Because the German people 
“are fighting a decisive battle for their survival or destruction, a struggle 
which the hatred and envy of their enemies have forced upon them,” the 
exigencies of that struggle compelled the German nation “to exert all its 
strength ” and gave it “ the right to avail itself of all means within its reach.” 2 
A reference to the blood kinship of Dutchmen and Germans suggested that 
Dutchmen were to be treated in a favorable way by the occupant. 

It was stated in the Reich Commissioner’s order of May 29, 1940,* that 
“to the extent required for the fulfillment of his duties, the Reich Commis¬ 
sioner for the occupied Netherlands territories assumes all powers, privileges, 
and rights heretofore vested in the King and the government in accordance 
with the Constitution and the laws of the Netherlands.” Under the decree 
of June 3, 1940, 4 the Reich Commissioner acts through a staff consisting of 
general and special commissioners. The general commissioners head the 
following sections: (a) General Administration and Judiciary; ( b ) Public 
Safety (Superior S.S. and Police Chief); (c) Finance and Commerce (Eco¬ 
nomics); ( d ) Special Matters. The section on General Administration and 
Judiciary embraces matters relating to: (1) general orders and legislation, 
constitutional law, and the Official Gazette; 5 (2) planning; (3) civil adminis¬ 
tration, especially the supervision of municipalities, with the exception of 
municipal police forces; (4) administration of justice, with the exception 
of the Reich police forces; 8 (5) culture, and matters relating to schools 

1 See above, chapter on “Austria.” 

2 See proclamation of May 25, 1940, below, p. 447. 3 See below, p. 448. 

4 See below, p. 450. * Verordnungsblatt fur die beselzten niedcrUindischen Gebieie. 

0 The exception of the Reich police forces is explained by the fact that the police also 
participate in the administration of justice. See above, chapter on “Courts.” 




and churches; (6) public health and “cultural and social welfare of juve¬ 
niles.” 7 

The Commissioner for Public Safety, who is at the same time Superior 
S.S. and Police Chief, commands the units of the military S.S. and German 
police forces stationed in the Netherlands; he supervises also the Netherlands 
central and municipal police. The General Commissioner of Finance and 
Commerce supervises all matters relating to: (i) the Ministry of Finance; 
(2) the Ministry of Economics (Commerce); (3) the Ministry of W aterways; 
(4) the Postal Administration; and (5) the Ministry of Public Welfare 
(with the exception of public health and “cultural and social welfare of 

The General Commissioner for Special Matters is entrusted with the 
political aspects of administration. His duties are, among other things, “the 
molding of public opinion” and the controlling of non-profit associations. 

Besides the general commissioners there are also special commissioners, 
who are appointed by the Reich Commissioner, either for the several 
provinces and cities or for specific purposes as need arises. 


For purposes of local administration, a subcabinet or headless government 
was organized consisting of the secretaries general of the existing Dutch 
ministries. 8 Secretaries general are functioning in the following ministries: 
Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Shipping; Ministry of Agriculture and 
Fisheries, Ministry of Waterstaat, 9 Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of 
Finance, Ministry of Social Welfare (labor matters belong also to this 
ministry), Ministry of Justice, and Ministry of General Affairs. 

To the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Shipping is attached the office 
of a Price Commissioner, appointed by the Secretary General of that 
ministry. 10 His authority extends especially to prices for “all articles of 
every-day need, to rentals for chattels and real property, and to tariffs for 
transportation, gas, and electricity, and to interest rates.” The Price Com¬ 
missioner is assisted by a board consisting of members representing: (1) the 
Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Shipping; (2) the Ministry of Agriculture 
and Fisheries; (3) the Ministry of Waterstaat; (4) the Ministry of the Inte¬ 
rior; (5) the Ministry of Finance; (6) the Ministry of Justice; and (7) the 
Ministry of Social Welfare. 

Powers and duties relating to food problems are vested in the Director 
General for the Food Supply, who is assisted by a Commission for Securing 

7 “Culture and social welfare of juveniles” refers, apparently, to Nazi indoctrination 
of youth. 

8 See order of June 21, 1940, below, p. 453 * 

9 The Ministry of Waterstaat supervises the waterways and waterworks, the ports, and 
generally all communications. There has never been a special ministry for communications 
in the Netherlands. 

10 See order of November 11, 1940, below, p. 485. 



the Food Supply. The members of this commission are appointed by the 
Secretary General in the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. 11 

For the regulation of transportation and traffic, the office of the Inspector 
General of Traffic was established under the supervision of the Ministry 
of Waterstaat. The Inspector General of Traffic is appointed by the 
Secretary General of the Ministry of Waterstaat to control all matters per¬ 
taining to transportation. As transportation of goods for personal require¬ 
ments, even on public highways, is prohibited without permits, one of the 
functions of the Inspector General is to receive and act on applications for 
such permits. Furthermore, the unauthorized use of motorcycles or any 
motor vehicles (with the exception of motor busses) having been prohibited 
in order to save gasoline, it falls within the jurisdiction of the Inspector 
General to decide on the granting of permits for the use of such vehicles. 12 

A Netherlands Reconstruction Service was established by the order 
of July 30, 1940, 13 with the objective of affording employment to members of 
the former Netherlands armed forces. This service is headed by a Labor 
Commandant and by an Administrative Director. Both are under the 
orders of the Secretary General in the Ministry of Social Welfare. 

To deal with labor problems in general, as well as with public occupa¬ 
tional guidance and the apprenticeship placement service, a State Labor 
Office was created within the Ministry of Social Welfare. 11 The State 
Labor Office is headed by a General Director. Labor procurement having 
been monopolized for the needs of the German war economy, the continua¬ 
tion of licenses issued to private employment agencies for trade and industry 
is made dependent on the decision of the Ministry of Social Welfare. Favor¬ 
able decisions are made with respect to agencies collaborating with the 
German authorities in procurement of labor for Germany. 

All the above-mentioned Dutch agencies are under the control of German 
authorities, especially of the four general commissioners who are members 
of the staff of the Reich Commissioner. Their powers are divided in such 
a way that each general commissioner controls a different ministry and 
agency, according to the jurisdictional division set forth in the decree of 
June 3, I940. 16 

In his order of August 20, 1940, 16 the Reich Commissioner stated that he 
would appoint certain categories of Dutch officials (these categories, the 
most important ones, being named), leaving to the secretaries general the 
right to appoint all others. But by the same order this right of appointment 
of the secondary officials by the secretaries general was made illusory by the 
further provision that the Reich Commissioner likewise reserved to himself 

11 See order of September 10, 1940, below, p. 484. 

'* See four orders of June 17 and 18, 1940, concerning transportation of persons and goods, 
below, pp. 480-82. 

13 See below, p. 494. 14 Order of September 24, 1940, below, p. 49s. 

** See below, p. 450. See below, p. 455. 



the right to exercise, if he saw fit, the power of appointment granted to the 
secretaries general in the immediately preceding section of the order. 

The following basic institutions of Dutch self-government were suspended 
by the orders of June 21, 1940, and August 11, 1941, 17 implementing the 
order of May 18,1940: 18 (1) the two chambers of the States-General ( General - 
staaten) comprising the parliament of the Netherlands, which is divided into 
upper and lower chambers as in some other countries; (2) the State Council; 19 
(3) the Provincial States (Provinzialstaaten) , which are representative bodies 
for the provinces; (4) the municipal councils in the cities. 

The local administration was reconstructed. Members of the merely 
advisory councils which have been created are not elected by the population 
as in the case of the previous local bodies, but are appointed by the mayors, 
who are strictly supervised and act according to the instructions of the 
supervising administrative authority. 20 

By the decree of July 4, 1941, 21 political parties were dissolved. Later 
on the Nazi Mussert Party was created for the purpose of promoting col¬ 


Disrespect for the exclusiveness of Netherlands nationality was displayed 
by the order of the Reich Commissioner which provided that a Dutchman 
acquiring German nationality shall not be deemed to have lost Netherlands 
nationality unless he renounces it within one year after acquisition of 
German nationality. 22 

Dual nationality was unknown in the Netherlands, but the occupant 
was eager to create a privileged class of fifth columnists who would be 
protected by German nationality and at the same time enjoy the rights of 
Dutch nationals and thus be able to perform political tasks for the benefit 
of the occupant within the Dutch national community. 

The law on citizenship was changed further by the occupant for recruiting 
reasons. According to Dutch law, a Dutchman serving in a foreign army 
loses his citizenship. When the creation of the Anti-Bolshevik Legion was 
proclaimed by the occupant, the law on citizenship was changed in such a 
way that service against Russia does not deprive one of Dutch citizenship. 23 


Especial significance is to be attached to the decree of February 7, 1941, 24 
to the effect that German nationals are to be indemnified for damages to 

17 See below, pp. 453, 461. 18 See below, p. 446. 

19 The State Council is an advisory body to the Crown, composed of members appointed 
by the Queen. The State Council also handles conflicts of jurisdiction between administra¬ 
tive authorities. 

20 See order of August 11, 1941, below, p. 461. 21 See below, p. 459. 

22 See order of August 8, 1941, below, p. 460. 

M Decree of July 25,1941, Verordnungsblatt, No. I 33 » July28,1941. 24 See below, p.473. 



property which they have suffered or may suffer in the occupied Netherlands 
territories as a result of the war. A special fund, called 11 Reconstruction 
Fund/’ was created for this purpose under the administration of the Secre¬ 
tary General of the Ministry of Finance. The income and expenditure of 
this fund are “established by an annual budget” and are financed by funds 
supplied by the Dutch Government. Thus the Dutch Treasury is paying 
for war damages caused by the German Army to German residents in the 
Netherlands. If Dutch Government funds are insufficient, the order pro¬ 
vides that'the Treasury may incur short- or long-term loans. 25 

Significance is also to be attached to the order concerning certain measures 
relating to civil claims. This order deals with the problem of civil claims 
which may arise from orders of the Reich Commissioner. 26 For example, 
an order from the Reich Commissioner may undertake the reallocation 
of property. The party aggrieved by such an order, or his successor, is 
excluded from relief in the courts. Such person may apply only to the 
Reich Commissioner himself. Thus the same authority which has issued 
an order aggrieving a party decides upon the right of appeal from such 
order. Moreover, the same decree states that suit on civil claims shall not 
be brought against Germans or corporations having their domicile in the 
Greater Reich if the cause of action shall have arisen directly or indirectly 
as a result of the events of war. Thus, Dutchmen are precluded from suing 
for war damages, yet they must provide money to pay Germans for such 
damages caused by Germans. 


With regard to finance, the same technique was adopted in the Nether¬ 
lands as in other western countries which had been occupied. Reichs - 
kreditkassenscheine were issued and later on the Bank of the Netherlands 
had to exchange them for gulden. The exchange rate between the 
Reichsmark and the gulden was established as follows: I gulden equals 
133 Reichspfennigs. 27 

A clearing arrangement was established between the Netherlands and 
Germany, as well as between the Netherlands and other countries, through 
the German Verrechnungskasse (Clearing Institute). 

As the occupant was unwilling to maintain a balance of trade between 
the Netherlands and Germany, Dutch exporting firms had difficulties when 
their claims were frozen in Germany. Disruption of Dutch economic 
life was the result. The Secretaries General in the Ministry of Trade, 
Industry, and Shipping, and in the Ministry of Finance, were then compelled 
by the occupant to issue an order authorizing Dutch banks to extend loans 
to the exporting firms “which find themselves financially embarrassed 

15 See order of June 21, 1940, below, p. 487. 

20 See order of December 19, 1940, below, p. 471. N 

27 See order of July 16, 1940, below, p. 488. 



through their inability to enforce claims arising out of shipments abroad.” 28 
An instrumentality was thus created whereby the Dutch banks financed 
further exports to Germany, with consequent inflationary effect upon the 
Dutch currency. 

A peculiar evolution occurred in the field of exchange control. At the 
beginning of the occupation the Netherlands was divided from Germany 
by a customs frontier and by exchange control restrictions. Later on, 
because of the relatively strong and well organized Dutch economy, the 
occupant saw the advantage of incorporating the Netherlands totally into 
the economy of the Greater German Reich. A logical consequence of such 
incorporation was the abolition of customs frontier and exchange control 
restrictions between these two countries, especially as to the transfer 
of money from one country to another. Germany, however, had owed large 
sums of money to individuals in the Netherlands for many years before the 
war. These sums had been since 1931 under the protection of the German 
Exchange Control Law, so that all the demands of Dutch creditors were met 
with the answer that the German debtor was not allowed to pay his money 
because of exchange control restrictions. However, the exchange control 
restrictions had to be abrogated and this took place on March 31, 1941. 29 
Theoretically, money could then be transferred from Germany to the 
Netherlands. But on the same day a decree was published to the effect 
that every Dutchman withdrawing money from the Greater Reich to the 
Netherlands should pay a tax for the benefit of the Dutch Treasury, this 
tax amounting to 72 per cent of the sum withdrawn. 30 Both of the decrees— 
on the removal of the exchange control frontier, as well as the taxation of 
blocked Dutch funds—went into effect on the same day, April 1, 1941. 
Although the taxes were to be paid to the Dutch Treasury, the interested 
persons were not eager to pay such a high percentage and thus the taxation 
decree made illusory the relief granted by the removal of the exchange 
control frontier. 31 


On September n, 1941, the Reich Commissioner issued an order con¬ 
cerning the declaration of United States assets in the Netherlands. Ac¬ 
cording to this decree, real and personal property situated in the occupied 
Netherlands had to be declared, if owned or even controlled by the Govern¬ 
ment of the United States, by citizens of the United States, by corporations, 
private associations, foundations, endowments, trusts, or other forms of 
organizations which have their seat or principal place of business in the 

18 See order of October 10, 1940, below, p. 489. 

*» VerordnungsblaU , No. 65, April 1, 1941. Such a move may be explained by a desire to 
manifest a community of the economies of the two countries. 

30 See decree of the Reich Commissioner of March 31, 1941, ibid., No. 66, April 1, 1941. 

31 Later, as of September I, 1941 (ibid., No. 169, August 30, 1941), this decree on taxing 
money transfers was abolished as a too obvious device to nullify the effect of the other decree. 



United States or which have been incorporated under the laws of the United 
States. Moreover, the order embraces also other persons (beside those 
mentioned above) if beside the real and personal property situated in the 
occupied Netherlands, such persons have business branches in the United 
States. 32 



The resistance of the Dutch population to the occupant is strong, despite 
the fact that some Dutchmen are forced into collaboration, especially as 
regards the German war economy. The activities of Dutch patriots gave 
rise to the creation by the occupant of a system of severe punishments for 
any inimical act. On October 16, 1941, an order was issued concerning 
defense against acts of sabotage, in which the Reich Commissioner declared 
that “Germany is engaged in a fight against the enemy powers,’" “on behalf 
of Europe’s future.” 33 Although for every act of sabotage the death penalty 
was prescribed, the Reich Commissioner did not give an exact definition of 
sabotage. According to his order, any person will be punishable by death 
as a saboteur who wilfully perpetrates “an act punishable under existing 
statutes and intended or liable to endanger public order or security of public 
life.” If one considers that any violation of administrative regulations 
pertaining to public order may be interpreted as endangering that order, 
the possibility is presented of practically unlimited application of the death 
penalty, even for offenses which are essentially of a purely administrative 
character. Moreover, attempt is punished in the same way as perpetration. 
No judicial guaranties are given as to trial of such offenses. For example, 
the date of trial shall be fixed “without the usual restriction as to the time 
within which such date may be set.” The indictment “may be preferred 
orally.” In such cases a German Superior Court, acting as a special court, 
has exclusive jurisdiction. 34 

Not only are the lives and personal liberties of Dutchmen held in pawn, 
so to speak, against non-compliance with the New Order, but also their 
property. By the order of July 4, 1940, 35 the property of persons and asso¬ 
ciations which have furthered “activities hostile to the German Reich or 
Germanism, or of whom it must be assumed that they will further such 
activities in the future” may be confiscated. The same applies to property 
and rights which have been used for the furtherance of activities hostile to 
the German Reich or Germanism, “or which are capable of being thus used.” 
The effect of this order is therefore to create, and it was doubtless so in¬ 
tended, an attitude not only of complete compliance with the orders of the 
occupant but also of complete dependence and even subservience. As men¬ 
tioned above, 36 such a provision is without parallel in law, for, according to 

M As to details, see decree below, p. 492. 33 See below, p. 477. 

84 Sec above, p. 33. 35 See below, p. 478. 36 See above, chapter on 11 Law.” 



well-established principles of criminal law, a person may be punished only 
for acts which have been committed or attempted, not for acts which may 
be committed in the future. 37 

87 As to other institutions of German occupation in the Netherlands, see references to these 
in the several chapters in Part I of the present work. 




In connection with the invasion and occupation of Norway certain 
governmental acts of the occupying power and of the King and Government 
of Norway must be considered, since they influenced to some extent the 
institutions of military occupation. 

It was apparently Germany’s intention to occupy Norway rather by 
using threats than by actual fighting. In order to create a menacing 
atmosphere, the German Minister to Norway, Dr. Brauer, 1 on April 5, 
1940, invited a group of distinguished guests, including members of the 
Norwegian Government, to the legation to see a German film. The guests 
were horrified at the film, which showed the German conquest of Poland, 
with gruesome pictures of the bombing of Warsaw, accompanied by the 
caption: “For this they could thank their English and French friends.” 111 

The invasion began on the night of April 8. Several hours later the Ger¬ 
man Minister in Oslo presented to the Minister of Foreign Affairs an ultima¬ 
tum stating that Great Britain and France were violating Norway’s neutral¬ 
ity and intended to occupy that country; that the German Government had 
therefore begun “certain military operations which will result in the occupa¬ 
tion of strategically important points in Norwegian territory”; and that 
the “German Government therewith takes over the protection of the 
Kingdom of Norway during this war.” 2 The German Minister expressed 
the hope that Norway would not resist, using the words of the film showing 
the bombing of Warsaw: “For such horrors you would have to thank your 
English and French friends.” 8 The document ended with certain demands. 
Thus the Germans insisted that all places (in particular, all the coastal forts 
or military establishments) which the German troops wanted to take should 
be surrendered to them without any resistance. The Norwegian troops 
were requested to cooperate and were told that if they behaved well, they 

1 Dr. Brauer appeared to be the main agent for the invasion inside Norway, and he acted 
through German agents and Norwegian fifth columnists headed by Quisling. It is believed 
that the Germans did not expect any serious opposition. Dr. Brauer was seen at three 
o'clock in the night of the invasion on the docks of the harbor apparently waiting for the 
German fleet. On the same night the transatlantic telephonic communication was also 
in the hands of German fifth columnists. When the American Minister to Norway, Mrs. 
Hardman, attempted to place a call to Washington, a voice with a German accent informed 
her that it would perhaps not get through. The fifth columnists were even more active in 
disrupting other means of communication. See F. J. Harriman, Mission to the North 
(Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1941), p. 252. 

|tt See Halvdan Koht, former Foreign Minister of Norway, Norway—Neutral and Invaded 
(New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941), pp. 57-58. 

In connection with this film performance, Koht remarks: “Undoubtedly it was intended 
to show the Norwegians what would be the result of resisting Germany." — Ibid. 

2 Ibid., p. 66. * Ibid., p. 69. 




might be permitted to keep their arms. Under the conditions laid down in 
this ultimatum the Germans would have at their disposal, in addition to 
military points, the railways and steamers, the pilots and the lighthouses, 
the mail, telegraph, and telephone services, the wireless, the radio, and 
the press; 1 the whole country was to be blacked out and the publication of 
weather reports was to cease. In addition, it was demanded that all com¬ 
munications between Norway and the countries to the west, including Amer¬ 
ica as well as Europe, be severed. 

The reply of the Norwegian Government was in the negative. In the 
midst of the severe bombing of Oslo, the government and the King, as well 
as the Storting, left the capital. At the last moment the gold assets of the 
Bank of Norway were saved. 

On April 9 the Storting held meetings at Hamar, at which all but five of 
the 150 members were present. The Nygaardsvold government 5 informed 
the King that they placed their resignations at his disposal in order to permit 
a new government to be formed representing all the political parties. The 
Storting summoned the Nygaardsvold government to remain in power and, 
on the motion of Mr. Hambro, president of the Storting, unanimously 
adopted the proposal to grant to the government complete authority to 
safeguard the interests of the Kingdom, such authority to continue in effect 
until the government and the Presidential Board of the Storting should 
agree to call the Storting into session again. President Hambro also stated 
that if the then existing government should be compelled to establish itself 
in a foreign country, that government alone would remain “the legal Gov¬ 
ernment of Norway, and the international symbol of the independence of 
the kingdom. M 6 

In the meantime, Major Vidkun Quisling, the head of the pro-Nazi fifth 
columnists in Norway, formed a cabinet in Oslo. 

On April 10 the German Minister asked for an appointment with the 
King, and, on being received by the King and the Minister of Foreign 
Affairs, proposed that the fighting cease and that the King appoint Quisling 
as his Prime Minister. After consulting the government and members of 
the Storting, the King refused. 7 

On April 11 an emissary from Quisling, a Captain Irgens, appeared at 
Nybergsund (where the King took refuge after the bombing of Hamar) 
and invited the King to come to Oslo. No one, however, wished to receive 
the emissary. On the same day a message was received from Dr. Brauer 
that he would like to see the King again; but the King decided that if any 
new German proposals were to be made, they should be conveyed to the 
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Koht, and word to that effect was sent to 
Dr. Brauer. No reply was received from the German authorities, but 

< Koht, pp. 69, 218-20. * Nygaardsvold was Prime Minister of Norway at that time. 

fl Koht, pp. 75 - 77 . 7 Ibid " PP* 79 - 84 . 



instead Nybergsund, a small village without military significance where 
the King and government had taken refuge, was bombed by air. 8 During 
the bombing the King and the population fled to the neighboring forest, 
where the King spent several hours in the snow in conversation with the 
citizens and giving comfort to them. 

When all Norway was occupied, the King and the government went to 
England, wherefrom they are continuing the war against Germany. 


When the fifth-column activities of Quisling were displayed in the form 
of open treachery, public opinion in Norway was so strongly opposed to him 
that the Germans felt it necessary to dismiss the puppet government formed 
by Quisling and to look for other forms of collaboration with Norwegians. 

In the latter part of April, 1940, an Administrative Council was established 
with the collaboration of the Supreme Court of Norway, 9 and I. E. Christen¬ 
sen was chosen as its president. The duty of this Council was to carry on 
the current administrative functions of government in the occupied areas, 
while the northern part of Norway was still defending itself under the leader¬ 
ship of King Haakon. In a letter approved by the Cabinet Council on 
April 19, 1940, King Haakon made it clear, however, that although the 
Administrative Council was necessary under the circumstances, it could not 
represent the King or his government, because the Council was controlled 
by the occupying power. 10 

On April 24, 1940, 11 the Fiihrer promulgated a decree in which he appointed 
a Reich Commissioner to administer the occupied Norwegian territories. 
By this decree the Reich Commissioner was made “guardian of the interests 
of the German Reich and, within the domain of civil administration,” was 
“vested with supreme governmental authority”; he was also authorized to 
call on the Norwegian Administrative Council and the Norwegian civil au¬ 
thorities for collaboration in the administration of the country. The law and 
statutes theretofore in force were declared to continue in effect “ in so far as is 
compatible with the fact of occupation." 

The Reich Commissioner has offices in Trondheim, Bergen, Harstad, 
Hammerfest, and Kirkenes. He is assisted by his staff, the Reich Commis¬ 
sariat, which is divided into three main sections: Administration, Economy, 
and Propaganda. In addition, a ranking S.S. police officer supervises the 
police forces within Norway. The German police are active in all the 
communities. • 

Although the central Norwegian administration has passed through vari¬ 
ous stages (having been directed, first, by the Quisling Government; second, 

* Koht, pp. 85-86. • Ibid., pp. 132, 134. 

10 Monica Curtis, ed., Norway and the War, September 1939-December 1940, “Documents 
on International Affairs" (London, etc.: Oxford University Press, 1941. Issued under the 
auspices of the Royal Institute of International Affairs), p. 76; Koht, op. cit., p. 134. 

11 See below, p. 498. 



by the Administrative Council; third, by the State Council; and fourth, again 
by a government with Quisling as Minister-President ), 12 the Norwegian 
administration has remained essential# the same; however, control by the 
Nasjonal Samling has been gradually tightened. The country is divided 
into twenty districts known as Fylke , of which Oslo and Bergen are city 
Fylke (Stadt-Fylke). Every Fylke is headed by higher administrative offi¬ 
cials called Fylkesmenn. Under these Fylkesmenn are subordinate lensmenn . 
There is a Norwegian police force under the direction of the Norwegian 
Minister of Police. Directly responsible to him are fifty-five Chiefs of 
Police (Poli times Ur) , and the lowest police authority i 9 represented by the 
lensmenn . 18 

The higher administrative officers are predominantly members of the 
Nasjonal Samling Party. 

Beside the Reich Commissioner, who was vested with supreme civil au¬ 
thority, the Commander of the German Forces in Norway was vested “with 
supreme military authority.” The jurisdiction was divided between the 
Reich Commissioner and the military commander. If it should be necessary 
for the military commander to issue orders relating to the civil domain, these 
orders were to be enforced exclusively by the Reich Commissioner. Both the 
Reich Commissioner and the military commander in Norway were to be 
supervised by, and receive orders from, their respective authorities, i.e., the 
Reich Commissioner, by the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancel¬ 
lery; the military commander in Norway, by the Chief of the Supreme Com¬ 
mand of the Wehrmacht. The Reich Commissioner was declared to be di¬ 
rectly responsible to the Fiihrer, and .as the military authorities are also 
responsible to the latter, any conflict of jurisdiction between the Reich 
Commissioner and the military commander has to be decided by the 
Fiihrer . 14 

Attempts to Dethrone the King . The fact that the King enjoyed great 
popularity with the people and was continuing resistance from London was a 
disturbing element in the administration of the country. The Reich Com¬ 
missioner therefore endeavored to bring about the dethroning of the King by 
the Storting. Under pressure from the Reich Commissioner, the Presidential 
Board of the Storting (a kind of Speaker’s Committee, which has no consti¬ 
tutional functions) notified the King of its request that he abdicate; but the 
King, in a letter dated July 3, 194°. declined to resign his royal duties for the 
reason that the request emanated from a body which was subject to the con¬ 
trol of the occupying authorities and was not the free expression of the will of 
the Norwegian people . 15 

12 As to the evolution of the central government under occupation, see below. 

13 See Great Britain, Foreign Office, Secret German Documents Seized during the Raid on 
the Lofoten Islands on the 4th March , 1941 , Norway No. I (1941), pp. 4-5. 

14 See decree of April 24, 1940, below, p. 498. 

16 For correspondence between the Presidential Board and the King of Norway, see Annex 
1 to the present chapter. 



Later on the members of the Storting were summoned to meet in Septem¬ 
ber (those who had left the country being expressly excluded), for the 
purpose of dethroning the King, which action by statute required a majority 
of two thirds. Two texts of resolutions were proposed, one in Norwegian, 
the other in German. During the voting procedure it was discovered that 
the two texts differed substantially. 16 The Board of the Storting advised the 
members that an agreement had been reached with the German authorities 
to the effect that in consideration of their dethroning the King, a Norwegian 
National or State Council ( Riksraad ) would be formed to carry on inde¬ 
pendently the administration of internal affairs without interference by 
German authorities. In the trial vote* the highest total reached for sus¬ 
pension—not dethroning—was 92 votes for and 52 against. 17 Under these 
conditions, the efforts of the German authorities to bring about the de¬ 
thronement of the King failed. 

However, the Reich Commissioner announced on September 25 that the 
Royal House of Norway had been repudiated by a two-thirds majority of 
the Storting; that the King had no further importance and would not return 
to Norway. The Supreme Court of Norway had declared the dethroning 
of the King unlawful; and the action of the occupant aroused great sympathy 
for the King, with the result that his popularity rose even higher. The 
Reich Commissioner therefore felt compelled to issue an order on October 
7, 1940, concerning the prohibition of activities on behalf of the Royal 
House of Norway. Violations of this order were to be punished by forced 
labor for a period up to three years, or by imprisonment, as well as by 
fine. 18 

From the point of view of the Hague Regulations, this attempt by the occu¬ 
pant to dethrone the King was a violation of international law. The occu¬ 
pant has the right and the duty to restore order and safety in an occupied 
territory but this right does not include measures for dethroning the local 
sovereign such as were attempted in Norway. 

Implementation of the New Order . Following these measures designed to 
divest the King of his office and authority, the Reich Commissioner termi¬ 
nated the activities of the Administrative Council and appointed a State 
Council ( Riksraad ) in its place. The latter consisted of thirteen members, 
six of whom had been members of Quisling’s original cabinet, Quisling him¬ 
self not being included. An order was issued to the effect that all political 
parties and any other political organizations, with the exception of the 
Nasjonal Samling (the Quisling Party), were dissolved. 19 Under this order 
the Reich Commissioner was to appoint trustees for the liquidation of the 
affairs of the organizations so dissolved. As the order did not apply, how¬ 
ever, to the Nasjonal Samling, a monoparty system was thus created in 

16 See Koht, op. cit., pp. 157-58. 

17 Bulletin of International News , Vol. XVIII, No. 2 (January 25, 1941), p. 62. 

18 See below, p. 500. 10 See order of September 25. 1940, below, p. 499. 



Norway in harmony with the Nazi pattern. At the same time political per¬ 
secutions were begun against members of the preexisting political parties who 
were opposed to the New Order. 

A special r6le under the New Order was given to the party guards of the 
Nasjonal Samling. These party guards, who considered it their duty to 
punish members of the opposition by measures outside the law, were called 
Bird™ and were protected by the police authorities. 

In the further evolution of events, Quisling was made Minister-President 
of the Norwegian puppet government, and ostensibly proceeded to the 
integration of Norway into the New Order. He organized a Norwegian 
Legion and a Regiment Nordland, consisting of Norwegian volunteers serv¬ 
ing in cooperation with the German Army. In order to induce Norwegians 
to join these militaristic organizations, various privileges were granted to 
them. Particular reference may be made to a decree published by Quisling 
on February 26, 1942, postponing foreclosure sales of the property of such 
volunteers. 21 


The Norwegians, as representatives of the Nordic race, were declared to be 
of related German blood, and therefore Norwegian blood was declared to be 
a “racially valuable” contribution to German blood; hence the interest of 
the occupant in promoting procreation by Germans in Norway. A decree 
was published by the FQhrer on July 28, 1942, to the effect that children 
begotten by members of the German armed forces in Norway and born of 
Norwegian women should be granted special subsidies through the office of 
the Reich Commissioner for the occupied Norwegian territories, these bene¬ 
fits including costs of delivery of such children, payment to the mothers of 
maintenance benefits for the time before and after delivery, payment of main¬ 
tenance benefits for the children, the sheltering of mothers in clinics or homes, 
and similar care. As an additional means of encouraging such unions it was 
declared that the mother of a child begotten by a member of the German 
armed forces should be given suitable employment. 22 

Undesirable books were banned from libraries. Among others, were 
included as a rule all books by Jewish and Polish authors and all books on 

20 Koht, op. cit., p. 177. 11 See below, p. 503. 

22 See below, p. 504. 

As the Dutch were also declared to be of related German blood, the decree above cited 
was likewise made applicable to the Netherlands. 

The Norwegian population resists the endeavors on the part of the occupant to promote 
“friendly relations” between Norwegian women and German soldiers, as is seen from an 
order of the German Chief Police Inspector in Solvaer which is among the documents seized 
in the Britisfi-Norwegian raid on the Lofoten Islands on March 4, 1941. In this order the 
Police Inspector instructs his subordinates how to act when a Norwegian girl of friendly 
disposition toward Germans has her hair cut short by her indignant compatriots. This 
Norwegian practice of cutting the hair of such girls was announced several times in the press. 
Secret German Documents, op. cit., p. 13. 




The New Order was especially protected by two courts, a Norwegian Spe¬ 
cial Court and a German Court. The Norwegian Special Court was estab¬ 
lished to try cases concerning the prohibition of political parties in Norway 
and activities in behalf of the Royal House of Norway. 23 This court is com¬ 
posed of a presiding judge and two associate judges, appointed by a com¬ 
missioner of state for the Department of Justice. No appeal lies from the 
decision of the Special Court. The German Criminal Court has an almost 
unlimited jurisdiction, since the president and its members are directly under 
the supervision of the Reich Commissioner. No preliminary investigation 
by the court is required, and it may issue notice and summons within so short 
a time as twenty-four hours before the trial. There is no appeal from the 
decision of the German Court. 24 

The Attitude of the Norwegian Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of 
Norway, which played an important r 61 e in the creation of the Administrative 
Council, hoped to insure a regular administration under military occupation. 
When it became clear, however, that administration by Germany was being 
carried out in violation of international law, the Supreme Court blamed 
these practices on the members of the Administrative Council (called “state 
councillors”), as well as on the Reich Commissioner himself. 

The Supreme Court declared that the dethroning of the King was un¬ 
lawful. 26 The open conflict between the court and the occupying authorities 
started, however, with the issue of a decree by the Department of Justice 
to the effect that the State Councillor should have authority to appoint and 
dismiss members of Conciliation Commissions, to remove from the panels 
jurors, expert witnesses, and assessors, and to appoint others in civil as well 
as criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court saw in this decree an attempt 
to interfere in the composition of the courts, and especially a violation of the 
principle of the independence of courts, which is guaranteed by the Con¬ 
stitution of Norway and which was also proclaimed in the first decree of the 
Reich ( ommissioner. In a letter sent out by the Noi wegian Supreme Court 
to the Department of Justice dated November 19, 1940, M the Supreme Court 
gave expression to its concern regarding this violation of international law, 
pointing out also that the independence of courts is prescribed by the Con¬ 
stitution and that the Ftihrer’s decree of April 24, 1940, declared that the 
Norwegian law would continue in force so long as this was consistent with the 
occupation.- 7 Consequently the Supreme Court requested that the order 
of the Department of Justice should not be carried into effect. The Reich 
Commissioner replied that neither the Supreme Court nor other Norwegian 
courts were justified in raising the question of the validity of decrees issued 

” See 6rder of October 25. 1940, below, p. 503. 

” Order of August 27, 1940, below, p. 501. “ Koht, op. cit., p. 142. 

28 See Annex 2 to the present chapter. " See below, p. 498. 



by him or his councillors, 28 whereupon the Supreme Court again stated that 
it could not adopt this point of view, reiterating its former statement that 
under the Norwegian Constitution the courts have the duty of testing the 
validity of laws and administrative orders, and adding that in its opinion the 
courts may, during a military occupation, test the validity under interna¬ 
tional law of decrees which are issued by the organs of the occupying power. 29 
Such being the considered opinion of the Court, it further stated that its 
members felt themselves unable, in the light of the views expressed by the 
Reich Commissioner, to remain in office, and they accordingly resigned on 
December 23, 1940. 30 

ANNEX l 31 


(a) Letter from the Presidential Board of the Storting to II. M. the King of Norway , 

June 27, 1Q40 

After Oslo and the surrounding districts had been occupied by German troops on 
April 9, and the following days, and Hr. Vidkun Quisling, in the absence of the 
Government, had considered himself entitled to form a Government, the necessity of 
having an order established which secured the population against unnecessary sufferings 
occurred to Norwegians of all occupations and classes of society in the occupied 
territory. For this reason the Administrative Council was appointed, with the ap¬ 
proval of the German occupation authorities, on April 15 to conduct the civil adminis¬ 
tration in the occupied territories. An attempt was made beforehand to get into 
communication with Your Majesty to have this order approved. When this did not 
succeed, the Supreme Court considered that it ought to undertake the nomination 
of the Council. This step helped in creating orderly conditions and has given the 
population such security as has been possible under the existing circumstances. 

After the whole country was occupied by German troops and the King and Govern¬ 
ment had left the country the question arose of changing this arrangement. The 
members of the Presidential Board of the Storting who have been able to meet, were 
therefore assembled in Oslo on June 14 together with representatives of the four great 
political parties and the workers’ trade union organization, and held discussions, in 
some of which the Administrative Council took part. On the basis of these discussions 
between the above representatives the following arrangement was concluded with the 
German authorities: 

“Since the King and his Government are outside Norway and are therefore 

prevented from carrying out the functions imposed upon them by the Constitution, 

28 Koht, op. cit., p. 179. 

29 Letter of December 12, 1940, in Annex 2 to the present chapter. 

80 Ibid. See also Curtis, op. cit., p. 14. 

81 The texts of the documents printed in annexes 1 and 2 to this chapter are reproduced 

from translations printed* in Curtis, Norway and the War—September 1939-Dcccmbcr 1940 , 
op. cit., pp. 129-34, 144-45. The author is indebted to the Royal Institute of International 
Affairs and to the Oxford University Press for permission to include these translations in 
the present volume. 82 Texts from Ny Norsk Kvitbok. 



the Presidential Board of the Storting regards it as its duty to the country and 
people to nominate a National Council ( Riksraad ). 

“The Storting is therefore being summoned to give its consent to this step and to 
reach further agreement about the authority of the National Council as regards the 
administration of the country. The Presidential Board of the Storting is laying 
before the Government proposals to include the following resolutions: 

“I. The authority which was given to the Nygaardsvold Government at the 
meeting of April 9 is no longer valid. 

11 II. The Nygaardsvold Government can no longer be recognized as a Gov¬ 

“ III. Since the King is outside the frontiers of the country he is not in a position 
to exercise his constitutional functions. 

“Note: on this point the Presidential Board reports that in consideration of the 
situation it has asked the King to resign his constitutional functions for himself 
and his House. 

“IV. The National Council takes over until further notice the business of the 
Government and the King's constitutional functions. A new Parliamentary election 
is postponed till after the conclusion of peace, while it is an instruction to the Na¬ 
tional Council to arrange a new election as soon as conditions permit, but at latest 
three months after the conclusion of peace. 

“V. The members of the Storting who at present are abroad shall not be sum¬ 
moned during the rest of the period of the Storting's functions and shall be given no 
opportunity to take part in its meetings. 

“VI. Until a new election the National Council has authority, in conformity with 
Point IV, to take all decisions which are required for the good of the country. 

“VII. Norway's constitutional form of government as a monarchy shall still 
continue in the future." 

As will be understood, it is a condition of this arrangement that the King resigns for 
himself and his House his constitutional functions. And out of consideration for the 
prosperity of the people and the future of the country we address, painful as it may be 
felt by Norwegian minds, an urgent prayer to Your Majesty to accede to our request on 
this point. 

Trusting that Your Majesty will understand our action, we ask to have a report of 
Your Majesty’s decision by July 12 at latest. 

With deep respect, 

Magnus Nilssen, Gabriel Moseid, P. Tiiorvik, Neri Valen, Ivar Lykke 
(added to the Presidential Board by the Conservative Group). 

(b) Reply from II. M. the King of Norway to the Presidential Board of the Storting , 

London , July 3 , 1940 33 

I have received a communication of June 27, 1940, from the Storting’s Presidential 
Board, and have with the full realization of my personal responsibility and of the serious¬ 
ness of the situation conscientiously considered the resolution so fateful for our country 
which is dealt with in the letter of the Presidential Board. 

I came to Norway in 1905 on an invitation from the Norwegian people, and I 
have in the years that have passed sought to the best of my ability to fulfil the duties 
which were thus imposed upon me. 

My new Fatherland became infinitely precious to me, and I became bound to the 
Norwegian people by intimate ties. My motto, “All for Norway", has always been 

38 Ny Norsk Kvilbok. 



and still is the guide of my actions, and if I could be persuaded at this time that I 
should best serve my people by resigning my royal task, or if I could be sure that behind 
the Storting’s Presidential Board in this matter there was a majority of the Norwegian 
people, I would—however deeply it would pain me to be separated from Norway— 
comply with the request that the Presidential Board has addressed to me. I see from 
the letter of the Presidential Board that the proposal which the Presidential Board 
has thought of laying before the Storting has been arrived at through an agreement 
with the German occupation authorities in Norway. It is thus not an expression of a 
free Norwegian decision, but the result of a compulsion exercised by foreign military 

It appears further from the letter that those members of the Storting who have 
evaded this compulsion by taking up their abode outside the frontiers of Norway are 
not to have an opportunity to take part in the meetings which are to come to a decision 
on the proposal in question. 

The Storting in 1814 maintained an entirely opposite principle, since it refused to 
recognize the mandate of those members of the Storting who came from districts 
occupied by foreign military power. It founded itself on the logical consideration that 
such an occupation must fetter the freedom of decision of the members: now the repre¬ 
sentatives—including even the President of the Storting—who still retain their freedom 
of decision are to be excluded from the Storting, while those who are living under the 
pressure of foreign power are alone to decide the fate of the country. 

I should be failing in my constitutional duties by accepting a decision made by a 
Storting summoned under such conditions. 

In Point III of the Presidential Board’s proposal it is said, “Since the King is outside 
the frontiers of the country he is not in a position to exercise his constitutional func¬ 
tions.” Section 11 of the Norwegian Constitution provides expressly that the King 
can be as much as six months outside the country without the consent of the Storting, 
and with such consent still longer. If the King is abroad on active service the provision 
in Section 41 of the Constitution suggests that special consent is on the whole not 

At the meeting of the Storting at Elverum on April 9, 1940, the President, with the 
unanimous approval of the Storting, said that the King and the Government, if it should 
be necessary out of consideration for a free and independent Government, should be 
able to take up their abode outside the country, without any limit of time being 
suggested in this connexion. There is thus no constitutional foundation for the asser¬ 
tion that I cannot carry out the task which the Constitution lays upon me. 

The present Norwegian Government under the leadership of Prime Minister 
Nygaardsvold was nominated on March 19, 1935' the composition of this Government 
has later undergone a number of changes, the latest being the appointment of Ministers 
belonging to other political parties than that which the Government originally came 
from. Thus a National Government has been created, which has had the unanimous 
confidence of the Storting, expressly recognized by its vote in its meeting of April 
9 of this year. 

In accordance with Norwegian constitutional practice, the Storting is fully entitled 
to revoke a vote of confidence which has been given ;<6ut in such case this must be done 
by a Storting which acts with full constitutional freedom, and has not been arbitrarily 
deprived of a number of its members. Neither of these conditions is fulfilled by the 
assembly which the Presidential Board is now to summon. 

In the agreement between the Presidential Board and the German occupation 
authorities it is said that neither can the Norwegian Government carry out its con¬ 
stitutional functions, since it is outside Norway. I and the Government have no 
higher wish than to be able to exercise our functions within the country; it is merely 



foreign power which has forced the Government, together with myself, to leave the 
country. We have clone this in conformity with the resolution of the Storting, in order 
so far as possible to preserve a free and independent control of the Norwegian kingdom. 

If such conditions could be created in Norway that I and the Government could 
return to the country to continue our activities in full liberty, it would be done imme¬ 
diately. The obvious condition for this must be that all foreign military forces should 
leave the country. The arrangement, however, with the German authorities on which 
the Presidential Board has come to an agreement assumes the continued maintenance 
of the German occupation, and in these circumstances I see no possibility for the ex¬ 
istence of a free Government of Norway within the frontiers of Norway. 

When in the proposal of the Presidential Board it is remarked that fresh elections to 
the Storting can first be held “after the conclusion of peace”, it is thereby assumed that 
Norway will not come to enjoy peace before the war between the Great Powers is 
carried to a conclusion. The Presidential Board is doubtless right in this, but that 
being so it is also clear that the proposed arrangement does not help the Norwegian 
people to the peace for which it so deeply longs. 

Nor does the agreement with the German occupation authorities serve to promote 
several of the economic interests which are so important to the welfare of our people. 
I recall that the German demands to the Norwegian Government, at the time of the 
attack on the country on the night of April 9, involved inter alia a complete economic 
blockade of Norway in relation to all Western countries in and outside Europe. And 
important economic interests would, under a new Government such as is proposed by 
the appointment of a new 41 National Council ”, come to suffer even greater damage than 
at present, since it could not take charge of the vitally important interests abroad 
which are now looked after by the present Government. 

I will further indicate an aspect of the question at issue which is not touched on in the 
letter of the Presidential Board, but which throws a vivid light on the arrangement 
now in question. I refer to the scope of the authority which the proposed National 
Council is to have. I will say no more of the fact, manifest to every one, that the 
National Council in practice will have to follow German directions as long as the 
German occupation of Nonvay lasts; but I will emphasize what follows from the resolu¬ 
tion published at this time by the German Government in Berlin, that no foreign 
States are to have diplomatic representation in Oslo, and that the foreign policy of 
Norway will be conducted by the Department of Foreign Affairs in Berlin. 

This clearly means that the new National Council in Oslo does not represent an 
independent kingdom, but merely a German dependency. An abdication on my part 
would therefore not even formally be to the advantage of an independent Government 
in Nonvay; the National Council would not acquire all the constitutional functions 
appertaining to the King. I cannot see that the Presidential Board of the Storting 
has any constitutional basis whatsoever for modifying the lawful decisions of the 
Storting which have hitherto been taken. It is on the contrary quite evident that 
the whole of the proposed arrangement conflicts with the Constitution. 

I cannot see that I should be acting in the interests of the country by submitting to 
the demand addressed to me by the Presidential Board, whereby I should approve an 
arrangement which conflicts with the Constitution of Norway, and which it is sought 
to impose by force upon the Norwegian people. By doing so I should abandon the 
principle which has guided my actions throughout all my reign, viz.: to keep myself 
strictly within the framework of the Constitution. 

The liberty and independence of the Norwegian people are to me the first com¬ 
mandment of the Constitution, and I consider I am obeying the commandment and 
watching over the interests of the Norwegian people best by adhering to this position 
and the task which a free people gave me in 1905. 



ANNEX 2 34 


(a) Letter from the Norwegian Supreme Court to the Department of Justice , 

November 19, 1940** 

The Department of Justice has, on November 14. I94°» prepared an Ordinance 
giving the Constituted State Councillor 36 authority, inter alia, to appoint and dismiss 
members of Conciliation Commissions, and to remove from the panels jurors, expert 
witnesses and assessors, and to appoint others. This Ordinance applies equally to 
civil and criminal proceedings. It gives the Constituted State Councillor the oppor¬ 
tunity of interfering in the composition of the Courts of Justice in a way which is in 
manifest conflict with the principles on which the constitution of our courts is founded. 
The Ordinance exceeds the limits of the authority enjoyed by the Constituted State 
Councillor as representative of the power in occupation, according to the Hague 
Convention of 1907, with the regulations which it contains for the conduct of war on 
land, especially Article 43, according to which the authority in occupation is to “ respect 
the laws applying in the country unless absolute impediments exist”. The Ordinance 
also exceeds the authority given to the Constituted State Councillors by paragraph 3 
of the Reich Commissioner’s Ordinance of September 28, together with paragraph 3 
of the Fuhrer's Ordinance of April 24, 87 which lays down that laws heretofore valid 
remain in force, so long as this is consistent with the occupation. The independence 
of the Courts is prescribed in the Constitution, and is expressly recognized in accordance 
with international law, in the Reich Commissioner’s ordinance of September 28, 
paragraph 5. If the Ordinance should be carried into effect it would have fateful 
effects on the administration of justice. To maintain this independence is of funda¬ 
mental importance to the security of justice. As the highest representative of the 
judicial power, the Supreme Court must request that the Department’s Ordinance 
shall not be carried into effect. 

(b) tetter from the Norwegian Supreme Court to the Department of Justice , 

December 12, 1940 88 

The Reich Commissioner on December 3 sent the Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court a letter, copy of which is attached. 89 The letter was received on December 7. 
After the Supreme Court had sent the Department of Justice its letter of December 9 
regarding the Ordinance concerning the age limit, the members of the Court considered 
the Reich Commissioner’s letter. Judges Broch and Stang were not able to be present. 
As will be seen, the Reich Commissioner has stated that neither the Supreme Court 
nor other Norwegian Courts can adopt an attitude towards the question of the validity 
of directions issued by the Reich Commissioner, or by the Constituted State Councillors 
by virtue of his Ordinance of September 28, since it is exclusively the province of the 
Reich Commissioner to settle what regulations can serve to promote public order and 
the interests of public life in Norway. We wish to maintain that the Courts according 
to Norwegian constitutional law have the duty to test the validity of laws and admin¬ 
istrative Ordinances. During a military occupation the Courts in our opinion may in 
the same way take up an attitude as to the validity in international law of Ordinances 

« Texts from Curtis, op. til., pp. 144 ' 45 -. , , “ Norsk Tideml December 27. 1940. 

» i e the Head of the Department appointed by Herr I erboven.— I ranslator s note. 

87 See below, p. 498— Ed. 38 Norsk TuUnd , December 27, 1940. 

88 Not available. 



which are issued by the organs of the occupying power, in settling questions of law 
which come before them in a case, to such an extent as international law allows. We 
cannot follow the view of the authority of the Courts which the Reich Commissioner’s 
letter expresses, without acting in conflict with our duties as judges of the Norwegian 
Supreme Court. We therefore find that we are unable to continue in our office. We 
anticipate a further conference with the Department of Justice on the subject of the 
date for our resignation. 



Poland was dismembered by the occupant in the following way: 

Western and northern Poland, as well as the Bialystok area in the east, 
were incorporated into Germany. 

The Government General was established from territories of central and 
southern Poland. 

Other eastern territories were made part of the General Commissariat of 
White Russia, and the southeastern province of Wolhynia and parts of the 
province Polesie were incorporated into the Reich Commissariat of the 

I. Polish Incorporated Territories 1 


By an order of October 8, 1939, 2 the western parts of Poland were incor¬ 
porated into Germany. The following administrative units were created: 

1. The Reich district Danzig-West Prussia, embracing the Free City of 
Danzig and the Polish districts of Pomerania, Lipno, and Ripin, as well as 
the German district of Marienwerder (formerly a part of the province of 
East Prussia) and some counties belonging formerly to the province of West 

2. The Reich district Wartheland, embracing the Polish province of 
Poznan (Posen), and the Polish city of L6dz (called now Litzmannstadt) 
with surrounding areas. 

3. The northern Polish district of Ciechandw was incorporated into the 
province of East Prussia. The eastern Polish district of Suwalki was also 
incorporated into East Prussia as part of the county of Gumbinen. The 
Polish industrial city of Bialystok, with large surrounding areas, as well as 
most of the Polish district Grodno, was attached to East Prussia as a separate 
administrative unit (Regurungsbezirk ). 

4. The industrial city of Katowice with a large surrounding area and also 
the Cieszyh district were incorporated into the district of Silesia. 

Every Reich district ( Gau ) is administered by a Reich governor ( Reichs - 
statthalter) and is divided into government districts, which in turn are divided 
into counties and municipalities. The governor is at the same time head of 
the Nazi Party in each district ( Gauleiter). 3 

1 Referred to in German legislation as incorporated Eastern Territories (Eingegliederte 
Ostgebiete) because of their geographical position in regard to Germany. 

3 See below, p. 506. 3 See above, chapter on 14 Administration/’ 




The office of the Reich governor is divided into the following sections: 
General Financial and Organizational Matters; Public Health and Hygiene; 
Education, Instruction, Furtherance of Cultural and Communal Life; Agri¬ 
culture, Settlement, Reallocation of Realty and Waterways; Economics and 
Labor; Forestry and Hunting; Private and Public Construction. 4 

To the office of the Reich governor is attached the ranking S.S. and Police 
Chief, who is at the same time the agent of the Reich Commissioner for the 
Strengthening of Germanism. This officer is mainly responsible for the de¬ 
struction of Polish nationhood and its supplanting by German elements. 

The Reich Minister of the Interior is designated as the responsible agency 
for the reorganization of the incorporated territories. 6 

1 he incorporated areas are subject to an especially severe r6gime, in¬ 
volving genocide for the Polish population. On short notice Poles were 
removed from their homes 6 and replaced by German settlers. Institutions 
of I olish administration were abolished and replaced by German institu¬ 
tions. Polish cultural institutions were closed, and the German language 
was made the language of education in the schools. 


I he Reich Minister of the Interior was designated to introduce German 
law in the incorporated territories. He in turn has delegated some of his 
powers to the governors and even to the police. 

The Reich Minister of the Interior has gradually introduced a great body 
of German statutes in these territories, starting with the Conscription Law 
for military service, the Nuremberg Laws, and the Four-Year Plan. A great 
many German decrees were declared applicable in the territory. 7 

The replacement of civil law was difficult because in these incorporated 
areas there is the following variety of civil codes: In the districts which 

4 Second order of November 2, 1939, below, p. 507. 

^*See decree of October 8, 1939, below, p. 507. ' 6 See above, chapter on ‘‘Genocide.” 

. * rca dy in 1940 the following decrees had been introduced: administration of economy 
{KtunsgcsslzlMlt, June 8, 1940, No. 120); regulations regarding the common weal in housing 
(towL, June 28, 1940, No. 126); introduction of family alimonv statutes (ibid., July 4, 1940, 
No. 119); regulations concerning production of energy (power) (ibid., July 6, 1940, No. 121)* 
administration of contributions to the Cattlemen’s Association (ibid., July 9, 1940, No. 129); 
introduction of air-raid prevention measures (ibid., July 18, 1940, No. 125); introduction of 
real estate taxes (ibid., July 18, 19.10, No. 132); carrier doves (ibid., July 13, 1940, No. 128); 
emergency service (labor service) (ibid.y]\i\y 14, 1940, No. 132); determination of damages 
(toid., July 25,1940, No. 134 ); com batting contagious diseases (ibid., July 28,1940, No. 135); 
vinegar brandy and vinegar production (ibid., July 29, 1940, No. 147);' introduction of the 
pohce regulations of the Reich Minister (ibid., July 31, 1940, No. 137); public seed manage¬ 
ment (ibtd., July 31, 194O; No. 139): introduction of the German medicine book (ibid., 
lune 8, 1940, No. 141); training for the professional forestry service (ibid., August 7, 1940, 
No. 140); introduction of mining law (ibid., August io, 1940, No. 143); transportation of 
police officers (ibid., August 13, 1940, No. 143); regulations concerning chimney sweepers 
\ibuL, August 13, 1940, No. 149); manpower (Arbeilseinsatz) (ibid.; August 13, 1940, No. 
150;; promotion of tourism (ibid., August 19, 1940, No. 149); protection of trade (ibid., 
August 20, 1940, No. 149); diseases of animals and protection of animals (ibid., August 29, 
x 9 f°» 57); meetings and meeting localities (ibid., August 31,1940, No. 161); protection 

of labor (ibid., August 5, 1940, No. 164). 


belonged to Germany before 1918, there is still in force a great part of the 
German Civil Code ( Biirgerliches Gesetzbucli) . In other parts which did not 
belong to Germany before 1918 but which formed the so-called ‘‘Congress 
Poland,” the Code Napoleon was and is still in force. In the districts of 
Suwalki and Bialystok, the Russian Civil Code of 1864 is still in effect. 


The decree of June 13, 1940, 8 has introduced in the incorporated eastern 
areas the German basic law on organization of courts ( Gerkhtsverfassnngs - 
gesetz) , as well as subsidiary laws concerning the judiciary such as: the law 
on the jurisdiction of courts, with respect to changes in the division of courts, 
of December 6, 1933; 9 the decree concerning a uniform organization of 
courts of March 20, 1935; 10 the law concerning the distribution of functions 
in the courts of November 24,1937; 11 the decree concerning qualifications for 
the office of judge, prosecuting attorney, notary, and attorney, of January 4, 
1 939 1 12 decree concerning preparation for the office of judge and of prosecut¬ 
ing attorney of May 16, 1939; 13 decree concerning certain measures in the 
organization of courts and the administration of justice, of September 1, 
1 939 ^ 14 an d the implementing orders issued on September 8 and October 4, 
1939 ; 16 decree concerning simplification of the legal examinations of Sep¬ 
tember 2, 1939. 18 Polish courts have ceased to exist. German judges have 
been appointed; and Polish judges are used only as clerks in the transitional 
period for translating Polish records in cases still pending in the courts. 
By the introduction of the decree concerning qualifications for attorneys 
of January 4, 1939, Polish barristers were practically barred from the courts. 



By decree of November 22, 1939, 17 & e Reichsmark was declared the sole 
legal tender. By the same decree the German Treasury and Reichsbank 
offices which had been established in these territories, and other delegated 
agencies, were directed to exchange the notes of the Bank Polski and the 
Polish Government coins for all residents at a rate of exchange of two zlotys 
for one Reichsmark. 


According to the decree of September 17, 1940, 18 the property of Polish 
citizens was subject to sequestration, trustee administration, and confisca¬ 
tion. This does not apply to the property of persons who have acquired 
German nationality. Sequestration must be ordered in regard to the prop¬ 
erty of Jews and those persons who have fled or are not merely temporarily 

8 See below, p. 510. • Reichsgesetzblatt, I, p. 1037. Watt, p. 403. 

11 Ibid., p. 1286. n Ibid., p. 5. li Ibid., p. 917. 14 Ibid., p. 1658. 

18 Ibid., pp. 1703, 1994. u Ibid., p. 1606. 17 See below, p. 521. 18 See below, p. 511. 



absent. Sequestration may be ordered if the property is required “for the 
public welfare/’ particularly in the interests of Reich defense or the strength¬ 
ening of Germanism, or if the owners had immigrated, after October i, 1918, 
into the territory which had belonged to the Reich until the end of the war 
of 1914-18. Excluded from such sequestration are movable objects for 
personal use, and cash, bank or savings bank balances, or securities of less 
than one thousand Reichsmarks. Trustee administration may be ordered 
in regard to all property that is subject to sequestration, “if orderly admin¬ 
istration requires it.” The legal transactions of such administrators are 
limited by Section 7 of the above-mentioned decree. 19 Sequestrated prop¬ 
erty may be confiscated for the benefit of the Reich, if the public welfare, 
particularly Reich defense or the strengthening of Germanism, so requires. 
If a person maintains that he is a German citizen and therefore his property is 
not subject to sequestration or management by a trustee, the procedure must 
be suspended immediately, pending a decision by the competent German 

All measures concerning sequestration, administration, and confiscation 
coming under this decree are carried out through a special trustee agency 
(Haupttreuhandstelle Ost ), under the authority of the Commissioner for the 
Four-Year Plan; and, as regards agriculture, through the Reich Commis¬ 
sioner for Strengthening Germanism. The trustee agency appoints admin¬ 
istrators or trustees for the administration—and subsequently the liqui¬ 
dation—of the properties seized from Poles and Jews. The procedure of 
expropriating the property of Poles and Jews is considered as a primary 
matter of policy. Severe penalties are imposed for interfering with such pro¬ 
cedure. “ If the culprit acts from opposition to the new political order, or if 
the case is particularly serious for some other reason, then the death penalty 
shall be imposed.” 20 


The Four-Year Plan has been introduced in the incorporated territories by 
orders of October 30, 1939, and July 9 > I94°- 21 These territories have thus 
been integrated into the economy of the Greater German Reich. Poles 
have been in great part expelled from economic life, such as trade, handi¬ 
crafts, banking, and especially from agriculture. Special divisions in the 
office of the respective Reich governors in the Polish incorporated terri¬ 
tories, such as the Division of Agriculture, Settlement, Reallocation of Realty 
and Waterways, and the Division of Economics and Labor, are responsible 
for uprooting Poles from economic life and putting Germans in their place. 
The colonization policy is being carried out chiefly by the first of the two 
divisions above mentioned in connection with its functions relating to settle- 

See below, p. 512. *° See Section 20 of the decree, below, p. 516. 

11 See below, pp. 521, 522. 




ment and reallocation of realty, as well as by the Special Agent of the Reich 
Commissioner for the Strengthening of Germanism. 

To induce Germans to settle in the Polish territories, numerous tax privi¬ 
leges were granted to them. 22 An order concerning tax abatement was issued 
on December 9, 1940, introducing a great number of essential tax exemptions 
for German nationals and persons of German origin in the incorporated 
Eastern Territories. This order begins with a blunt statement of its purpose: 
“In the effort to establish and promote Germanism ( Dentschtum ) in the 
incorporated Eastern Territories through taxation measures, as well as by 
other means, we order. . . 23 Thus, Germans with an income of 25,000 

Reichsmarks or less may deduct 3,000 Reichsmarks from their income \v hen 
calculating and paying income taxes. The exemption of 3,000 Reichsmarks 
is increased by 300 Reichsmarks for each minor child belonging to the 
household. The regular tax exemptions provided for in the German prop¬ 
erty tax law are tripled for Germans. Germans are released from real estate 
acquisition tax, while a person selling property to a German is released from 
the sales tax. There are also provisions for release from inheritance and gift 
taxes if the acquisitor is a German. During the calendar years 1940-50, 
German retailers and partnerships may claim exemption from income tax 
on as much as 50 per cent of the net profit or 20 per cent of the gross profit 
of the enterprises. The corporation tax is lowered for Germans to 20 per cent 
of incomes not exceeding 300,000 Reichsmarks, and 30 per cent of incomes 
above that amount. Property of Germans which belongs to a farm and lum¬ 
ber business or to an industrial enterprise or plant is to be taken into account 
in the assessment of property tax only in so far as its value exceeds 250,000 
Reichsmarks. By these tax exemptions and many others, the German set¬ 
tlers were immediately placed in a stronger and more advantageous position 
than the Poles, who were destined, in accordance with the occupant’s plans, 
to suffer a general liquidation. 


II. The Government General 


The Government General of Poland was established by the decree of the 
Fuhrer of October 12, 1939. 24 The Governor General has the title of Reich 
Minister and is responsible directly to the Fuhrer. The headquarters of the 
government are in Cracow. The office is divided into six sections (chancel¬ 
lery, legislation, territorial organization, personnel, organizational matters, 
business) and fifteen divisions (finance, economy, interior, labor, agriculture 
and food, justice, enlightenment and propaganda, foreign exchange, educa- 

»As to transfer of Polish population and German colonization, see above, chapter on 

v See order of December 9, 1940, below, p. 516. 

s< See below, p. 522, 



tion, health service, building, forestry, post, railroads, and trustee adminis¬ 
tration). 25 In addition there is a liaison office for relations with the army 
and with the administration of the Four-Year Plan. The Chief of Police 
coordinates his activities with those of the office of the Governor General. 

The Government General is divided into the following districts: Cracow, 
Warsaw, Radom, and Lublin; and after the occupation of Lw6w in 1941 (up 
to which time it had been held by the Russians), an additional district was 
formed consisting of Lw6w and Eastern Galicia. Each district is under a 
governor. The title of "Governor” is, however, complimentary, so that a 
district under a governor is not called 4 ‘government.” The districts in turn 
are divided into counties and municipalities. The municipal administration 
is in the hands of mayors, the Governor General appointing those officials in 
communities of over 20,000 inhabitants, while in smaller communities they 
are appointed by the governor of the district. In communities of less than 
10,000 inhabitants, the mayor selects live advisers, and in communities of 
over 10,000 inhabitants he selects ten advisers to assist him in the adminis¬ 
tration^ the municipalities. The district governor may in his discretion 
appoint a special commissioner to act with the mayor. This commissioner 
supervises the community, being empowered to suspend, change, or in¬ 
validate any order of the mayor and to issue orders of his own. The com¬ 
munity may not contract debts without the previous consent of the Governor 


There are two main types of courts, German courts and Polish courts. 
Germans may be tried only by German courts, but Poles are regularly tried 
by Polish courts, unless a case against the interests of the German Reich or 
of a German is involved. 

1. German Courts. German courts of general jurisdiction function as 

(a) German courts of original jurisdiction try criminal cases, if one of 
the parties is a German, or if the offense involves 11 the security and authority 
of the German Reich and people,” or if the offense was committed on the 
premises of a German authority or in connection with activities of German 
authorities. The German courts have jurisdiction in civil cases if a German 
is involved or if the case pertains to matters concerning German commercial 

(b) German Superior Courts try, mainly, appeals from the court of origi¬ 
nal jurisdiction. They function in Cracow, Rzeszdw, Lublin, and Lw6w. 26 

(c) German Special Courts. Every district has one special court, whose 

jurisdiction is defined in every case by orders and decrees promulgated by 

“See Adami, “Die Gesetzgebungsarbeit im Generalgouvernement,” in Deutsches Recht, 
Vol. 16 (1940), p. 605. 

w See decree of February 19, 1940, below, p. 526. 


the Governor General. For example, they try cases involving offenses 
against banking, against the order of confiscation of private property, against 
the order requiring Jews to wear special signs, etc. 

2. Polish Courts . The jurisdiction of Polish courts is permitted with re¬ 
spect to those cases which do not come within the jurisdiction of a Ger¬ 
man court. 27 These courts apply Polish law. The types of Polish courts 
which are allowed to deal with judicial business are municipal courts, dis¬ 
trict courts, and appellate courts. The Supreme Court of Poland is not 


A comparison of the decree on sequestration of private property issued in 
the Government General 28 with the analogous decree issued in the incor¬ 
porated territories 29 is worth while. In the decree on sequestration in the 
incorporated areas, one of the chief reasons given for confiscations and se¬ 
questrations is the “strengthening of Germanism.” The decree in the Gov¬ 
ernment General states that sequestration may be ordered in connection with 
the performance of tasks “serving the public interest.” In particular, in the 
Government General property may be liquidated because it is “financially 
unremunerative or anti-social. Since the occupant has the right to 
define these terms, he has likewise the opportunity to use this decree for 
purposes of loot and political pressure. Under both decrees, sequestrated 
property may be given to trustees for administration. As sequestration is a 
mass phenomenon in the Government General, a special Trustee Adminis¬ 
tration {Treuhandstelle) has been organized. The decree for the Govern¬ 
ment General provides that when the trustees take over property, the rights 
of third parties in the sequestrated property are suspended. However, the 
trustee may claim debts owed to the property by third parties. By this 
decree, also, abandoned property may be seized, in which case the rights of 
third parties abate, although it should be noted that the director of the 
Trustee Administration has the right to grant exemptions from such abate¬ 
ment. This power is given to the German authorities as a weapon for 
political purposes. The same tendency is displayed by the provision that 
compensation may be granted for losses arising from the implementing of the 
decree, although legal processes are precluded. These provisions mean in 
effect that the interested person may always hope to get some compensation 
in consideration for services to the occupant. 


Another source of loot is taxation. Despite the economic distress of the 
inhabitants, taxes were raised. Thus the Polish property tax for the fiscal 

27 See decree of February 19, 1940, below, p. 529. 

28 Decree of January 24, 1940, below, p. 531. 

29 Decree of September 17, 1940, below, p. 511. 


year 1940 was increased by 50 per cent, 30 and registration fees were raised to 
200 per cent, 31 in comparison with the pre-invasion rates. A new tax was 
introduced, namely, a head tax, which communities are required to collect 
from their inhabitants. 32 

The occupant is also drawing heavily in other ways on the meager finances 
of the population. The budget for Poland, a country of 35,000,000 inhabit¬ 
ants, amounted in normal times to around 2,500,000,000 zlotys. An order 
concerning the budget of the Government General for the fiscal year 1940 33 
shows that the Government General alone had a budget of 1,004,004,440 
zlotys for a population which then numbered hardly a third 34 of the former 
population of Poland and which was deprived of normal conditions of life 
and income. 

The Four-Year Plan was introduced into the Government General by the 
decree of October 12, 1939. 35 The Commissioner for the Four-Year Plan, 
together with other German authorities, is especially called upon to “make 
the arrangements required for the planning of German life and the German 
economic sphere.” 36 Within the framework of the Four-Year Plan, offices 
for the control of commodities were created and practically all raw materials 
and agricultural products were seized and administered by German authori¬ 
ties. Among the offices thus established were raw material control boards 
such as (1) an office for iron and steel, to control the production, utilization, 
and trade in these products; (2) an office for coal, to control the production, 
distribution, storing, and consumption of coal; (3) an office for metals, to con¬ 
trol the production, distribution, storing, and consumption of metals; (4) an 
office for leather and furs, to control the trade in hides and furs. 37 The most 
important Polish industries were taken over by a specially created corpora¬ 
tion presided over by Goring and called “Gdring A.G. Werke.” 

The anti-German attitude of the Polish population led the occupant to use 
special devices to get agricultural products from the Polish farmers. The 
Germans began first of all to destroy private trade, with Polish currency as 
their first target. A decree was published inviting every Pole to deposit 
for six months with certain banks under German control all Polish currency 
with the exception of two hundred zlotys. After the six months had elapsed, 
the money was to be stamped and returned to the depositors. There was 
also a provision that the money which was not deposited should lose its 
value. The Germans knew that the Poles mistrusted them and would not 
deposit their money. There were, indeed, very few deposits, and after six 

30 Decree of March 16, 1940, below, p. 540. 

31 Decree of February 14, 1040, below, p. 540. 

32 Decree of June 27, 1940, below, p. 540. 33 Order of March 3, 1941, below, p. 541. 

, 34 This was prior to the enlargement of the Government General through the inclusion of 

Eastern Galicia. In 1941 and 1942 the budget was more than doubled. 

35 See the decree, below, p. 522. 

36 As to labor, Jews, and other topics, see respective chapters in Part I, above. 

37 Adami, op. cil., p. 613. 



months the greater part of the Polish currency in circulation was destroyed. 
With the destruction of currency no trade could be carried on. Then the 
Germans proceeded toward their immediate goal. There were in Poland spe¬ 
cial cooperative agricultural societies for trade with the peasants. The Ger¬ 
mans took these societies under their control, and provided them with manu¬ 
factured goods for the needs of the peasants. Any peasant could buy all he 
- wanted upon presentation of a certificate from one of the cooperative associa¬ 
tions testifying that he had sold a part of his agricultural products to that 
association. Through the destruction of Polish currency and through the 
lack of manufactured goods in the towns, private trade was destroyed, the 
peasants being compelled to trade with the German-controlled agricultural 
associations. Thus the Germans came into control of the agricultural 
products of the country. 38 


Education has been completely reorganized. It is controlled by a special 
section under the Governor General in Cracow. Corresponding sections for 
education have been created under every district governor. 

The immediate administration of schools is directed by an educational 
council in the several cities and counties. The officials of the school ad¬ 
ministration must, however, be Germans, although the city and county edu¬ 
cational councils may appoint Poles and Ukrainians as school supervisors 
for a period of two years. 

German and Polish children are being educated in different schools. 
German children may attend only German schools and be taught only by 
German teachers, whereas Polish children may attend only Polish schools. 
In places where there are at least ten German school children a German 
school must be opened. 39 Polish grammar and professional schools have 
been to a certain extent reestablished. Private Polish schools, however, 
require a license from the district governor before they may be reopened. 

The budget as announced by the Government General provides a com¬ 
paratively large amount for educational purposes. This does not mean, 
however, that the occupant is doing much for Polish liberal education but 
rather that trade schools are being favored in order to prepare Polish youth 
for physical work and to develop in them technical skills. Such an educa¬ 
tional policy is in compliance with the general plan to use the Polish popula¬ 
tion mainly as a source of manpower. 30 * 

The universities and liberal art schools were closed. Libraries, labora- 

M German Organization of Distribution in Poland, 44 Documents relating to the Administra¬ 
tion of Occupied Countries in Eastern Europe,” No. 3, published by Polish Information 
Center (New York), pp. 6 ff.; Lemkin, “The Legal Framework of Totalitarian Control over 
Foreign Economies, ” cited above. 

19 “Ein Jahr Generalgouvernement,” Deutsches Recht (1940), P* * 797 * 

a9 *See above, chapter on “Labor.” 



lories, and art galleries, as well as paintings belonging to individuals, were 
carried into Germany. 

In the year 1940, on the birthday of the Fuhrer, the Governor General 
opened, at the premises of the Polish University of Cracow, an Institute 
for German Eastern Work {Institut ftlr Deutsche Ostarbeit). According to 
the by-laws of this institute, its main task is to continue and increase the 
hitherto completed German research work in the East, to do research in ac¬ 
tual problems of the Government General and to publicize the results of the 
research. The Governor General stated in his opening speech that "the 
establishment of the Institute means the resumption of the historical mission 
that Germanism is to fulfill in this place” and the "restitution of all that 
which the Poles took away from the German spirit and German influences in 
this place.” 40 


From the first days of the occupation the Polish population has displayed 
an attitude of stubborn and uncompromising resistance to the occupant. 
The Germans not only failed to organize a puppet or sub cabinet government 
in Poland as they partially succeeded in doing in Western Europe, but they 
feared this resistance so much as not to allow Polish agencies in the middle 
brackets of administration. The services of Poles are used only in the 
lowest branches of administrative agencies in the cities and communes. 
Occupied Poland is covered by a network of Gestapo and S.S. units whose 
business it is to trace Polish patriotic activities, particularly the strong un¬ 
derground movement. This movement is headed by a Directorate of Civil¬ 
ian Resistance which directs the underground press and propaganda as well 
as organized acts of sabotage and even open hostilities carried on by the units 
of a secretly organized National Army. The Directorate of Civilian Re¬ 
sistance has organized special Polish tribunals which are trying Germans and 
occasional Polish traitors. The sentences are issued in the name of the 
Polish Republic and they are normally communicated to the culprit before 
the penalty is executed, even if he is tried in absentia . 40a 

40 It is important to state that German cultural influences were never significant in the 
Polish University City of Cracow. The University of Cracow, one of the oldest in Europe, 
was founded in 1364, and was a spiritual center for central and southern Europe at that time. 
German students used to come to this university to study because education in Germany 
at that time was on a low level. The following is a statement from an American author 
about the University: “In 1364 the University of Krakow was founded, its formulation 
being strengthened by a large gift from Queen Jadwiga just at the end of the century. It 
quickly rose to such importance as a centre of learning and culture that in 1416 it had 
sufficient standing to justify it in ‘forwarding an expression of its views in connection with 
the deliberations of the Council of Constance.’ By the end of the 15th Century it ‘was in 
high repute as a school of both astronomical and humanistic studies,’ in these capacities 
helping form the mind of the great Polish astronomer Copernicus, who entered the university 
in 1491.”—Paul Super, The Polish Tradition (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1939), 
p. 94. 

40a The following is a sample of such a verdict: “In the name of the Polish Republic! On 
February 12, 1943, the Special Tribunal in Warsaw, after having considered the case of Her- 



The distrust and the fear of patriotic conspiracy go so far that no oppor¬ 
tunity for Poles to assemble, even for social events, is allowed. On April 9, 
1941, 41 an order was published introducing a general prohibition of dancing 
in the Government General. The prohibition is absolute and no exceptions 
are made in the form of special permissions. It applies likewise to private 
parties. Only dance performances in public may be licensed. 

III. The Eastern Polish Territories 42 

The eastern territories of Poland were disposed of and are administered in 
the following way: The city of Wilno, together with the western part of the 
province of Wilno, is administered as part of the General Commissariat of 
Lithuania. 43 Other territories between the pre-war Polish-Russian frontier 
and the area of Bialystok (which was incorporated as a separate unit into 
East Prussia) are administered as part of the General Commissariat of \\ hite 
Russia. The southeastern Polish province of Wolhynia and the Southern 
part of the province of Polesie 44 are administered as part of the C ommis- 
sariat for the Ukraine. 45 

man Gleist, chief of the Arbeitsamt (Labor Office) in Warsaw, born on July 2,1901, in Berlin, 
and accused in 1942 in Warsaw (a) of being, as chief of the Arbeitsamt, the main organizer 
of the street raids and one of the promoters of the action to deport the Polish population to 
Germany, and of showing cruelty in the performance of his duties in relation to the Poles; 
( b) of taking advantage of his position and obtaining personal profit by threatening the per¬ 
sons involved with deportation to forced labor in Germany — has passed the following verdict: 
Herman Gleist, born on July 2, 1901, chief of the Arbeitsamt, is deemed guilty of the crimes 
of which he is accused and is condemned to the penalty of death .”—Tygodnik Polski t 1943, 
Nr. 42, 43, 44. 

41 See decree of April 9, 1941, below, p. 555. 

42 The eastern Polish territories are to be distinguished from the incorporated Eastern 
Territories referred to in the German legislation. 

43 The Wilno area was occupied in September, 1939, and handed over to Lithuania by 
Russia in October, 1939. In June, 1941, the same area was occupied by Germany. 

44 For further details on the administration of these territories, see, in part, chapter on 
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, below, p. 232. 

43 The industrial city of Bialystok with its surrounding area, as well as the province of 
Wolhynia, was occupied by Russia in September, 1939, and later on in June-July, 1941, 
was occupied by Germany in the course of the Russo-German war. 



(Partially under German and Rumanian Occupation) 

The Reich Ministry for the Territories Occupied in the East, which was 
created in Berlin shortly after the war with Russia started in June, 1941, 
extends its control not only to eastern Poland and the Baltic States, occupied 
in the course of the Russo-German war, but also to the territories of the 
U.S.S.R. to the east of the eastern borders of the Baltic States, Poland, and 
Rumania as they existed at the outbreak of the war in 1939. The part of 
Russia between the rivers Dniester and Lower Bug is under Rumanian oc¬ 
cupation (see below). 


The territories occupied in Russia are included partly in the General 
Commissariat for White Russia, headquarters of which are in Minsk, and 
partly in the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine. Both commissariats 
include also Polish territories to the west of the Polish-Russian border as it 
existed at the outbreak of the war in 1939. The eastern parts of the Polish 
provinces ( wojewSdztwa ) Nowogr6dek, Wilno, and Polesie were included in 
the General Commissariat for White Russia, and the main part of the Polish 
province of Luck, as well as the southern part of the Polish province of 
Polesie, was included in the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine. 

The General Commissariat for White Russia forms part of the Reich 
Commissariat for the Ostland, which has its headquarters in Riga, and is 
supervised by the Ministry for the Territories Occupied in the East, with 
headquarters in Berlin. It consists of ten regional districts (Landgebiete ), 
namely, Minsk-Land, Wilejka, Glebokie, Borisow, Sluck, Lida, Slonim, 
Baranowicze, Nowogr6dek, and Hancewicze. The first five districts are 
grouped in the general region Minsk (Hauptgebiet Minsk). The other five 
districts are grouped in the general region Baranowicze (.TIauptgebiet Barano¬ 

The Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine, with headquarters in R6wne, 
is divided into six general commissariats: Zitomir, Kiev, Nikolajev, Tsher- 
nigov, Dnepropetrovsk, and Crimea. 111 It also is supervised by the Minis¬ 
try for Occupied Territories in Berlin. 

1 See also chapter on the Baltic States, above, p. 117. 

,a At the time this chapter is written the Russo-German front line is being moved west¬ 
ward, obviously necessitating changes in the administrative divisions. 




The areas under administration by the General Commissariat for White 
Russia and the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine dre in the hands of 
German non-military administrators, while those areas to the east of these 
commissariats, approaching the zone of military operations, are in the hands 
of military commanders. 


In the territories occupied in Russia which were part of the U.S.S.R. 
in accordance with the frontier of 1939, problem of private property 
presents various aspects. In the first stage of the occupation the occupant 
maintained completely the communistic status of ownership. The collective 
farms were continued. But .since the leaders of these farms had fled with 
the Russian Army, the occupant was faced with serious problems because 
of lack of leadership in farming. 2 On the other hand, the farms were dis¬ 
organized because of the scarcity of implements and sometimes even of 
manpower. The task of reorganizing and supervising agriculture in those 
areas was entrusted to German agricultural leaders ( Landwirtschajtsfuhrer) 
specially trained in Germany. In order to increase their authority, they 
were vested with some administrative powers, and with the right to punish 
farmers for not carrying out the agricultural program. 

The occupant was reluctant to return to the system of private property in 
those areas for the following reasons: such a redistribution of property— 
especially of land property—would require capital, implements, and a great 
many technical and legal formalities (such as measurements and recording by 
courts), and difficulties would arise in tracing titles of former owners, par¬ 
ticularly as to city property. The problem of finding criteria for establishing 
new property titles had also to be solved. In order to instil fear the German 
occupant relied largely on the principle of collective responsibility in Russian 
cities and farms, a principle which found its natural basis in the institution 
of collective ownership and work among the Russian people. If a collective 
farm, for example, failed to deliver its products, the occupant could punish 
collectively all the members of the farm. 

However, apparently for propaganda purposes, a change in the forms of 
ownership was envisaged by the decree of Reich Minister Rosenberg issued 
on February 28, 1942, 3 which was designed to “guide the agricultural 
population back to individual farming.” The decree states that collective 
farms ( kolhozy ) will be transformed into joint-farming establishments 
(i Gemeinwirtschaften ). The latter are considered, according to the decree, to 

* It should be stated that in a collective farm (kolhoz) the leader plays an important r 61 e 
because of his special qualifications of professional skill and training in methods of or- 

^ a * 1 ;See ^Occupied U.S.S.R.,” Free Europe , Yol. 5, No. 63 (April 10, 1942). P- 124; see also 
Lazar Volin. “The ‘New Agrarian Order’ in Nazi-Invaded Russia,” Foreign Agriculture 
(Washington: Department of Agriculture), April, 1943, p. 79. 



be of a merely transitional nature. From these an individual farming sys¬ 
tem, combining, as the decree puts it, the principle of cooperative farming 
with that of individual farming, is to be developed. 4 

Thus far, the following three forms of agricultural organizations have 
been created by the occupant in the territories occupied in Russia proper: 

(a) The Joint-Farming Establishment (Gemeinwirtschaft). The members 
of a joint-farming establishment are peasant farmers employed in the labor 
of plowing, sowing, and harvesting, and they receive wages. Full property 
rights in the small plots surrounding their houses are granted them, and 
individual cattle breeding is permitted. The difference between a joint¬ 
farming establishment and a collective farm is not of an essential nature, 
but several minor differences may be noted. The income in kind and in 
cash is distributed on a collective farm to the farmers on the basis of so-called 
14 labor days,” which are not actually working days but abstract accounting 
units used to calculate the amount of work performed by individual workers. 
In a joint-farming establishment the farmers receive wages. A further 
difference between these establishments and collective farms lies in the 
above-mentioned individual right to breed cattle granted now to managers 
of joint-farming establishments. As to property rights in the small plots 
surrounding the houses of the farmers, the innovation consists in the granting 
of full property rights in these plots, whereas in the kolhoz system the farmers 
had individual use of the plots only as long as they were members of the 
collective farm. 

(b) The Farming Association (Landbau-Genossenschaft). This is an 
association of individual farmers who receive merely the usufruct of the land. 
They are engaged in collective labor for only part of the year: for example, 
for plowing, sowing, and harvesting, and presumably because machinery 
for large-scale operations cannot be assigned for individual use in most areas. 
Members do not receive wages. The crops they harvest are divided among 
them, after deduction of compulsory deliveries in kind to the German 
administration. Here, as well as in the joint-farming establishment, the 
prospect is held out to the members that the land may in the future be 
conveyed to them in full ownership. 

( c ) Individual farms (Einzelwirtschaft). Individual farming is permitted 
only in exceptional cases by German authorities. Individual farms are 
granted as a reward for cooperation with the Germans against Soviet 
guerrillas as well as for demonstrated efficiency in farming. 

As to other farming institutions, it is worthy of note that state farms 
(sovhozy ) have been maintained and taken over by the occupant. The r 61 e 
played by the machine-tractor stations in the Soviet communistic system has 
also been important to the occupant in connection with this institution. 

4 At the time when the present book was completed further material on this problem 
was not available to the author. 



The machine-tractor stations are the central point in the organization of 
Soviet agriculture, because they hold the monopoly of mechanized imple¬ 
ments and lease these implements to collective farms. The services of ma¬ 
chine-tractor stations are paid for in kind in grain, sunflower seed, etc., at 
rates fixed by the government for different types of operations. By mo¬ 
nopolizing the mechanized implements in the machine-tractor stations, the 
Soviet Government was enabled to control and impose its will upon the col¬ 
lective farms. The occupant took over this institution completely because 
it served only too well his own purposes—the promotion of the German war 
economy, as well as of political control. 5 

On the whole it may be stated that the new or modified institutions of 
agricultural life have not abolished the communist system, despite the slight 
changes mentioned above. 

In the same manner as in territories occupied in the Baltic States and in 
eastern Poland “return to private property in the territories occupied in the 
U.S.S.R.” proper was used only as a propaganda slogan or as a reward for 
treachery on the part of Russians toward their own country. Under such a 
system the counterpart for reward is punishment, which is being applied 
extensively to Russian and Ukrainian peasants who are reluctant to co¬ 
operate with the occupant or are not efficient enough in their work. 


Russian workers are used to a great extent by the occupant in the oc¬ 
cupied territories and are also shipped abroad. An especially severe regime 
has been established for such workers in the occupied Russian area. Reluc¬ 
tance to work or inefficiency in work is being punished, such punishment 
ranging from flogging to the death penalty. 6 

Special provisions regarding wages were made for workers imported into 
Germany from the Reich Commissariat for the Ukraine, from the General 
Commissariat for White Russia, and from the territories to the east of the 
above-mentioned administrative units as well as to the east of the Baltic 
States. Thus, according to the decree of June 30, 1942, 7 issued by Goring, 
President of the Council of Ministers for the Defense of the Reich, the work¬ 
ers imported from these eastern territories (called Ostarbeiter) were given a 
special employment status (Beschdftigungsverhdlinis eigener Art). The 
eastern workers receive wages under these provisions only for work actually 
performed. In case of sickness they receive only free shelter and subsistence. 
No leave is granted. 

• Lazar Volin, oj>. cit., pp. 77 *" 8 ** _ _ 

e See “ Note of The People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, V. M. Molotov, 
to the ambassadors and envoys of all countries with which the USSR has diplomatic rela¬ 
tions,” April 27, 1942, Information Bulletin, Embassy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Repub¬ 
lics (Washington, 1942), p. 14. . . . ^ . ... 

See also E. Jaroslavskij, Vielikaja otjetshestviennaja vojna sonetskavo naroda protiv httlerov- 
skoj Germanii (Moskwa, 1942), p. 155 - 7 See be l° w . P- 556 . 


However, the most important feature of their legal status is shown 
by a comparison of wages paid German workers with the wages allowed 
eastern workers for similar work in accordance with the official wage scale 
schedule. As this schedule shows, the eastern worker actually receives for 
himself only a small amount of what the employer pays out in employing 
him. A special sum is deducted to pay for his subsistence, and the main 
part (especially in the higher brackets of wages) is paid by the employer to 
the state in the form of a special tax (Ostarbeiterabgabe ). 

As the Belgian industries were working for the German war economy they 
were allowed to import workers from the Ukraine. However, they could 
not profit without reservations from this cheap labor as they were also 
obliged to pay this special tax for using Russian labor. 8 

In addition to what is said above in the chapter on “Labor** regarding 
violations of international law, it should be stated that the occupant, by 
publishing the above labor decree and the attached schedules, has provided 
official evidence regarding Germany’s illegal exploitation of foreign labor 
as to wages. 


The problem of organizing justice in the Ukraine created many difficulties. 
The local courts (so-called “People’s Courts”), based upon the principles 
of communistic justice, could not be used for political reasons. On the other 
hand, because of the fact that the communist r6gime has been retained in its 
essential features, the need for courts to deal with civil matters was not so 
urgent as it would be in an area with a prevailing private-ownership regime. 
The occupant has resolved the problem of civil justice in the following way: 
An institution of local arbitrators (einheimische Schlichter) has been estab¬ 
lished to take care of civil disputes arising between members of the local 
population. These arbitrators are appointed by the Reich Commissioner 
for the Ukraine, upon the recommendation of the respective district com¬ 
missioners. The decisions of the arbitrators must be enforced. 9 For 
criminal cases there exist German courts patterned along the same lines as 
those in other occupied countries. 


The treatment of the Russian population during occupation reminds one 
of a punitive expedition in continuous operation. The Russian population 
has been engaged since the beginning of the occupation in constant guerrilla 
fighting with the occupant. Widespread collective penalties have been in¬ 
flicted by the occupant in the form of mass executions and mass destruction 

8 See decree of July 14, 1942, issued by the German military commander in Belgium, 
Vcrordnungsblatt, 1942, p. 966. 

9 At the time when the present book was completed, further material on this problem was 
not available to the author. 



of property. Especially has the scorched-earth policy carried out by the 
retiring German armies enlarged the extent of the destruction. In im¬ 
plementing the decisions of the Moscow Conference to the effect that war 
criminals should be tried by local courts of the countries where the crimes 
have been perpetrated, the Government of the U.S.S.R. ordered the first 
trials of German war criminals in December, 1943. These trials have re¬ 
vealed a gruesome picture of war atrocities. 

Bessarabia, Bukovina, and Transnistria 
(Occupied and Incorporated by Rumania) 


1. Political and Territorial Changes. Rumania joined Germany in its at¬ 
tack on Russia in June, 1941, as a result of an internal transformation of the 
state under German influence and also as a result of specific relations with 
Russia as they had developed since 1940, when Rumania was compelled to 
cede North Bukovina and Bessarabia to Russia. 

For several years Hitler had endeavored to penetrate Rumanian political 
and economic life, because Rumania occupied a strategic position, and also 
because it is a country rich in raw materials. Through his agents he fostered 
the Rumanian Fascist Iron Guard and organized it as his fifth column against 
King Carol. Carol resisted these disintegrating influences at first, by the 
execution in 1938 of the Chief of the Iron Guard (Codreanu), as well as his 
assistants, while they were “ attempting to escape ” from Bucharest one morn¬ 
ing at dawn. The King was, however, undermined by Hitler, who forced 
him to give up a part of Transylvania to Hungary under the Vienna ^‘arbi- 
tiation ” award rendered by Germany and Italy on August 30, 1940. 10 The 
popularity of King Carol was also weakened by two other losses of territory. 
In June, 1940, as stated above, he had ceded North Bukovina and Bessara¬ 
bia to Russia, when the latter, having mobilized, made a request for these 
territories. Bessarabia had constituted part of Russia until the end of the 
first World War, when it became incorporated into Rumania. Under the 
treaty of September 7, 1940, Rumania had also ceded Southern Dobruja to 
Bulgaria. 11 In the same month, King Carol was forced to abdicate by the 
new leader of the Iron Guard, General Antonescu, who declared himself 
Leader of the Rumanian State (Conducatorul Statului Romdn ), the state be¬ 
ing organized on Fascist lines. Antonescu placed King Carol’s son Michael 
on the Rumanian throne and forced Carol to leave the country and to go into 


2. “ Rumanianization.” This term refers mostly to Rumanianization of 
economic life, and it means that property and the most important branches of 

10 For text, see Affaires danubiennes, 1940, No. 8, pp. 81-82. u Ibid., pp. 84 ff. 



economic life, such as business, professions, and other occupations, may be 
exercised only by persons of Rumanian ethnic origin. Two trends paved the 
way for this process: the anti-Jewish trend, which became accentuated in 
Rumania several years before the war; and the territorial changes, which 
brought into Rumania masses of Rumanian refugees from Transylvania, 
Dobruja, Bessarabia, and Northern Bukovina. In this situation, the Ru¬ 
manian Government introduced Rumanianization laws providing for the 
taking over of properties and businesses from Jews and distributing them 
among Rumanians. The first important laws of this nature were promul¬ 
gated on October 4, 1940, and November 12, 1940. The law of October 4 
introduced the institution of Rumanianization commissioners in Jewish 
enterprises, and the November law ordered the ouster of Jewish employees 
from private concerns. On May 2, 1941, two further decrees were published 
which established anew organizational framework for Rumanianization, un¬ 
der one of which 12 an Undersecretariat for Rumanianization, Colonization, 
and Inventorization (Subsecretariatul de Stat al Romdnizarii , Colonizdrii si 
Inventarului) was created and established in connection with the presidency 
of the Council of Ministers. It is a central body which lays down policies 
concerning colonization of Rumanian refugees and the reallocation of prop¬ 
erty in Rumania. By the second law of this date a National Center for Ru¬ 
manianization was established. This center is attached to the undersecre¬ 
tariat and is supervised by the latter. The center is an operational agency, 
which deals with and takes over principally Jewish properties and actually 
distributes them among persons of Rumanian origin . 13 

North Bukovina and Bessarabia 

Bessarabia and Bukovina were occupied by Rumania and Germany in the 
first weeks of the war. After a short period of military administration the 
Leader of State, Antonescu, introduced civil administration in'the form of 
two governorships , 14 one for each province. To the governorships were at¬ 
tached directorates of various administrative services, which services were 
to be coordinated in each case by a special coordinating committee of the 
directorates concerned. Specific importance is attached to the directorate 
for Rumanianization, Colonization, and Inventorization, which has been 
given the right to have a special budget . 15 The governorship was divided 
into districts, with heads of administration called prefects. 

Rumanian administration was faced with many difficulties growing out of 
the sudden territorial changes. Here again the main attention of the gov¬ 
ernment was directed toward Rumanianization. The proclamation of July 
25» 1 94 I » 16 by the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, provided for a re- 

u Monitorul oficial No. 102. » See below, p. 563. 

14 Law No. 790, Monitorul oficial , 1941. 

* See decree-law of October 15, 1942, ibid., No. 241, p. 8974. 

M See below, p. 565. 



turn of refugees to Bessarabia, and Bukovina. However, only Rumanians 
and Germans by origin could obtain permission to return to these provinces. 
In order to strengthen the Rumanian element, Rumanian agriculturalists 
received 80 per cent tax exemptions and Rumanian business men and in¬ 
dustrialists were completely freed from taxation until March 3 *» * 943 * 
Jews were expressly excluded from the benefits of this law. 

A decree-law of May 26, 1942, 18 restored Rumanian citizenship in principle 
to the inhabitants of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, if they were Ru¬ 
manian citizens under the provisions of the revised law on Rumanian citizen¬ 
ship of June 28, 1940. Such citizenship was denied to three categories of 
persons: (a) persons who requested permission to return from Rumania to 
Bessarabia when it was occupied by Russia, with the exception of demobilized 
soldiers who were returning home; ( b ) persons who after June 28, I 94 °> Re¬ 
quired another citizenship than that of one of the republics of the Soviet 
Union; and ( c ) persons who left the territory occupied by Russia before it was 
reoccupied by Rumania. However, Rumanians by origin were not denied 
citizenship even if they came within this latter category. 

Because of the war, the records concerning real property were either lost or 
destroyed. The local courts were given great discretionary power in repro¬ 
ducing such records, which amounted to the formulation of new titles of 
ownership. Since under the Fascist form of government prevailing in Ru¬ 
mania the courts are subordinated to the executive power, large opportunities 
were thus created for a reallocation of real property for political reasons. 
Obviously, persons of Rumanian origin were the beneficiaries of such a law. 


Transnistria 19 is the name of the Russian territory between the pre-June 
1940 Russo-Rumanian border and the Lower Bug, delimited on the west 
side by the Dniester River, on the east side by the Lower Bug, on the north 
side by a line running approximately fromZhmerinka to Mogilev Podolsk, and 
on the south by the Black Sea. This territory was handed over by the 
Germans to Rumania for administration. A Rumanian governor was ap¬ 
pointed by Marshal Antonescu, with his headquarters in Odessa. German 
advisers were delegated to his staff by German authorities. The territory 
was divided into territorial districts and sixty-four counties {rayons), cor¬ 
responding approximately to Soviet administrative divisions. Rumanian 
prefects were put in charge of the districts. At the head of the counties were 
two higher officials, one Rumanian and one from the local population. 

In this territory, which had been under a communist property system 
since the Russian Revolution, the property relations under Rumanian admin- 

17 See law of April x, 1942, Monitorul oficial, No. 78. 18 Ibid No. 119. 

it The author uses the spelling “Transnistria” as given in the Monitorul oficial. 



istration were not changed to any great extent. Land ownership was 
granted for the most part as a reward for pro-Rumanian activities and 
zealous work. 

After the introduction of Rumanian currency (lei), the following exchange 
rate was established: 60 lei = Reichskreditkassenschein = io rubles. 

This territory became a large center to which Rumanian Jews were de¬ 
ported, in the same way that Poland was made a center for west European 
Jews. The deported Jews were forced to work under inhumane conditions 
in labor camps. Several hundred thousand Rumanian Jews of both sexes 
above fifteen years of age were deported to Transnistria from Bessarabia and 
North Bukovina. 20 

Special decrees were promulgated concerning these deportees. Conditions 
in Transnistria being very difficult for them, they escaped in some cases to 
Rumania. A special law published by Antonescu, Marshal of Rumania, 
Leader of State, fixed the death penalty for Jewish deportees who returned il¬ 
legally to Rumania, and persons who helped them to escape were to be 
punished by imprisonment up to twenty-five years. 21 

Another decree-law 22 instituted severe penalties for using secret mails and 
packages in communications with Transnistria, because the deportees, under 
Rumanian regulations, were to be completely isolated from their homes and 
friends in Rumania. 

Moral debasement in administration of justice is displayed by the decree- 
law of July 9, 1941, 23 by which the death penalty was provided even for such 
offenses as non-declaration of property left by the retreating enemy. Trial 
and execution had to take place within twenty-four hours. Unparalleled 
in legislation is the following paragraph of the above-mentioned law: “In 
case of flagrante delicto , the culprit shall be executed on the spot.” 

20 See Kulischer, op. cit., p. 115, and Krakauer Zeitung of August 13, 1942. 

21 Law No. 698, September 19, 1942, below, p. 567. 

22 See decree-law No. 252, March 28, 1942, below, p. 566. 23 See below, p. 566. 





Of all the countries occupied in this war Yugoslavia has been the most 
dismembered and has been divided into the greatest number of administra¬ 
tive units. Its territory has been occupied by Germany, Italy, Bulgaria, 
Hungary, and Albania. Parts of its territories were formed into the new 
puppet state of Croatia. 1 Even the idea of the pre- Versailles state o on 
tenegro was revived, although the state itself was not set up in a e mite 

This dismemberment of Yugoslavia serves not only the immediate political 
purposes of the occupant but also the purpose of disintegrating and dividing 
the political forces in the occupied areas so far as to make difficult in t e 
future the unification of all the political elements within the framework of 

one state. 

In the process of dismemberment, the German and Italian occupants 
have taken advantage of the fact that the country had difficult population 
problems. The population consisted of three main national groups (Slovenes 
living in the northwest, Croats in the central northern part, and Serbs living 
in the east and south); also of smaller groups such as Moslems (in Bosnia- 
Herzeg&vina), Macedonians (in the part of Macedonia which was taken in 
previous wars from Bulgaria and incorporated into the Kingdom of the 
Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes by the Treaty of Neuilly), Germans living in 
the so-called Banat and scattered in other parts of Slovenia, Italians scat¬ 
tered over Dalmatia and near Fiume, Jews, Albanians, and a number of 


Among these groups there were many differences and conflicts, the relations 
between the Serbs and Croats being especially hostile. The Croatian griev¬ 
ances consist mainly of the following: that the Treaty of Versailles had 
created a Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, implying in this name the 
idea of a three-nation state, whereas, according to the Croats, the Serbs have 
unilaterally endeavored to create an integrated Yugoslav state under Serbian 
leadership, without granting the Croats equal representation in the govern¬ 
ment. The Croats refer particularly to the Geneva agreement of 1918 be¬ 
tween them and the Serbs to the effect that the Croats should have equal 
representation in the government with the Serbs; and they maintain that 

1 When the Yugoslav Government protested, on May 12 and 24, against the dismembei- 
ment of Yugoslavia and the creation of the State of Croatia, Under Secretary of State Sum¬ 
ner Welles declared that he wished "to reiterate the indignation of this Government and the 
American people at the invasion and mutilation of Yugoslavia by various member states of 
the Tripartite Pact ’’—The Under Secretary of State to the Minister of Yugoslavia, May 28, 
% DeSiSneuVof State, Bulletin, Vol. IV, No. .02. June 7, I 94 U P- 683. 




the terms of this agreement were not observed by the Serbs. 1 In addition, 
the Croats assert that the constitution which was adopted in 1921 was not 
patterned along federative lines, and that the Croatian population was not 
duly represented in the making of this constitution. Furthermore, the fact 
that the constitution was changed by King Alexander in 1929 by means of a 
coup d'tlat augmented the Croatian grievances. And when the King changed 
the name of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes to “ Yugoslavia, 0 
the Croats saw in this change of name a new pattern for political homogeneity 
and a danger to their own national aspirations. 

The Croatian political parties at the time differed in their policies. The 
Peasant I arty under Radid, and later under Madek, opposed the centralizing 
tendencies of the Belgrade government, and Radid visited the capitals of the 
Allies in order to try to win them over to the Croatian cause. When a pro- 
Serbian radical party, created in Zagreb in 1929, approved the changes in the 
constitution, the Croats claimed that this party represented only a slight 
minority of the Croatian population, 95 per cent being organized in the op¬ 
position or Peasant Party. Upon Radid’s return to Zagreb after his unsuc¬ 
cessful political mission abroad, he and other members of the Peasant Party 
made an arrangement with the Serbs for participation in the Parliament. 
However, in 1928 Radid was shot during one of the sessions of the Parliament 
by an extremist Serb nationalist deputy. 

About the same time another Croatian party called the “UstaSe” or 
Cioatian Liberation Movement, was developing its activities along more 
radical and more revolutionary lines. Whereas Radid had endeavored to 
win the Allies of 1914-18 for the Croatian cause, the leaders of the UstaSe 
movement Pavelid and Kvaternik—collaborated with the countries dis¬ 
satisfied with the Versailles and Trianon treaties, namely, Germany, Hun¬ 
gary, the Macedonian Irredenta, and especially Italy, which had made claims 
to the Adriatic coast and was pursuing expansionist policies in the Balkans. 
These countries gave their support to the separatist program of UstaSe. In 
Italy, Pavelid and Kvaternik were given every support in training UstaSe 
men for future military and terroristic action. 

r 934i King Alexander of Yugoslavia was assassinated in Marseilles by 
members of the Usta§e. The assassins took refuge in Italy and no extradi¬ 
tion was granted. 3 

In 1938, the Croats participated in elections to the Belgrade SkupStina 
but subsequently the Croatians who were elected refused to enter the Parlia¬ 
ment, the elections having been used only for the purpose of displaying the 
political strength of the Croatian Nationalist Party. 

The UstaSe leaders, who were collaborating with the Axis Powers, took 

* Dr. August Kossutitch, "The Croatian Problem," International Affairs , Vol. XII, No. I 
(January-February, 1933), p. 79. * 

3 In the second trial by the Court of Justice in Aix-en-Provence (France) of the murderers 
ol Alexander, they were sentenced on February 11, 1936, in absentia to death. 



over the organization of a puppet state of Croatia when the Axis invaded 
Yugoslavia. On April 8, 1941, in the course of the invasion, Ante Pavelfc 
broadcast from abroad an appeal to the Croats to secede from the Serbs and 
to support Germany and Italy. 4 

The manner in which the Axis proceeded to divide Yugoslavia is shown in 
the following sections. 



I. The Division of Slovenia 

Slovenia, with a population of about 2,000,000 Slovenes, has been divided 
between Germany and I taly in accordance with an agreement signed in Berlin 
on July 8, 1941, by Dino Alfieri, Italian Ambassador, and von Weiszacker, 
German State Secretary for Foreign Affairs. 6 Hungary was also given a few 
small towns and villages with less than 100,000 inhabitants. Under the 
agreement between Germany and Italy, Germany annexed approximately 
three fourths of Slovenia, with a population of about 900,000 inhabitants, 
these parts being incorporated into Germany as a special district called 
Sudsteiermark and including Lower Styria, parts of Carinthia, and Upper 
Carniola. Italy annexed the province of Ljubljana, with about 350,000 in¬ 
habitants. 6 The Slovenes, being the immediate neighbors of Greater Ger¬ 
many and of Italy (the Slovenes dwell also in the neighborhood of Trieste and 
Fiume), have been considered by both countries as creating a natural barrier 
to their expansion in the Balkans. The division of this highly cultured 
Slavic nation has, especially with respect to German policy, a definite geno¬ 
cide purpose. 

A . Lower Styria -, Carinthia , and Carniola 
(German Occupation) 

Immediately after the occupation the occupant proceeded with the de¬ 
struction of the national Slovene pattern in the occupied area. 

The German language was proclaimed as the only official language. 7 All 
Slovene signs on offices and principal buildings were removed and replaced 
with German signs. The names and surnames of the population were per¬ 
mitted to be used only in the German form, both in speech and in writing. 
A great number of Slovenes were removed to Croatia and other parts of 

«Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, No. 6 (April 19, I94l), p. 5j8. 

* See New York Times , July 10, I94 1 . P- I > col. 4; Bulletin of International News, Vol. 

XVIII, No. 15 (July 26, 194O. PP-?79,999- . _ „ . .. 

0 Boris Furlan, Fighting Jugoslavia (New York: Yugoslav Information Center, [1943D, 

p. 4. 

7 Furlan, op. cil., p. 7- 



Yugoslavia, in order to make room for German colonists. The latter are 
recruited from the Reich and from Germans who were removed to Germany 
from Rumania (Bessarabia and Dobruja), from Italy (Southern Tyrol) 
and from Italian-occupied Slovenia. The process of colonization is called 
by the Germans Heimholung (bringing into the homeland), the Germans 
claiming that these territories belong to the German living space. A special 
bureau (Gaugrenzlandamt) sees to it that the vacated farms, after removal 
of the Slovenes, are colonized by German peasant families that are politically 
reliable. 8 

German teachers, together with other administrative personnel, were put 
in charge of Slovene schools and introduced teaching methods in harmony 
with the principles of National Socialism. In his endeavors to destroy all 
traces of Slovene culture, the occupant has demanded the surrender of 
Slovene books, including even prayer-books. 9 

The highly cultured Slovene population had developed an efficient system 
of financial cooperatives which were carrying on useful activities in agricul¬ 
ture and trade among the Slovenes. The cooperatives improved the stand¬ 
ard of living of the Slovenes and provided means for the creation of useful 
national cultural institutions. Hence the Slovenes cherished them as an 
instrumentality of social and national progress. Realizing the importance 
of these cooperatives in strengthening the Slovene national spirit, the Ger¬ 
man occupant, as one of the first steps after the occupation, proceeded to 
liquidate them. As early as May 19, 1941, a decree was issued in Lower 
Styria closing all cooperatives, savings banks, and agricultural associations. 10 
German banking institutions alone were allowed to function. In fact, only 
the Creditanstalt-Bankverein A. G. and the Landerbank in Vienna were 
permitted to open branches, in Marburg and Celje, although, in addition, a 
number of German savings banks were established. As the savings banks 
also had a political mission (i.e., the exercise of political discrimination in 
granting credits and withholding the repayment of deposits), special politi¬ 
cal commissioners were entrusted with the business of those institutions. 11 

It is stated in the last-mentioned decree that the repayment of deposits 
made prior to occupation shall be dependent upon the orders of the Chief of 
Civil Administration. When one realizes how the German occupant has 
handled bank deposits in other countries, especially Poland, one may see in 
this order an obvious instrumentality of racial discrimination and political 
oppression, the employment of which means that the Germans are privileged 
and the Slovenes underprivileged in receiving their deposits. 

Not only the banking system but also the monetary system was German¬ 
ized. German currency was introduced by the decree of May 28, 1941, 
effective as of June 1, 1941, in Lower Styria. As to Carinthia and Camiola, 

8 Furlan, op. at., p. 19. 9 Ibid., pp. 20-21. 10 See below, p. 582. 

11 See decree of June 5, 1941, below, p. 583. 



German currency was introduced as legal tender by the decree of May 23, 
1941, to become effective on June 1, 1941 12 The rate of the dinar was 
established as follows: 1 dinar equals 0.05 Reichsmark. 

Thus it is plain that the Germans are pursuing a genocide policy in Slo¬ 
venia. This policy is evident not only from the measures taken but also 
from public statements. The Stajerski Gospodar, a German new spaper which 
is appearing in the Slovene language in order to promote the policies of 
Germanism, stated on April it, 1942: “The most important task has been to 
prove that the inhabitants of Lower Styria are not Slovenes but Styr ian pa¬ 
triots and thus [are] qualified to be an integral part of the great German 
national community and able to graduate as perfect Germans. When in the 
near future Lower Styrians are serving in the German army, they will be yet 
one step nearer the supreme ideal of becoming totally German. 13 

B. Ljubljana 
(Italian Occupation) 

Of the remaining Slovene areas, the major part was organized as the 
province of Ljubljana, while some of the smaller areas in the neighborhood 
of the province of Fiume were incorporated directly into that province. 

The province of Ljubljana was annexed to Italy by royal decree-law of 
May 3, 1941. 14 The decree in question envisaged autonomy for this prov¬ 
ince which should take “into consideration the racial characteristics of the 
population, the geographical position of the territory, and its special local 
needs.” The powers of the Italian government were exercised by a High 
Commissioner appointed by royal decree on the motion of the Duce of Fas¬ 
cism, Mussolini, and it was further provided that the High Commissioner 
should be assisted by a council consisting of fourteen representatives chosen 
from among the “productive” classes of the Slovene population. As the de¬ 
cree states that the annexed territory has a “uniformly Slovene population,” 
the Slovene language was made “obligatory” in the elementary schools, 
while in secondary and higher education, instruction in the Italian language 
was made optional. All official documents must be printed in both lan¬ 
guages. Although a slight freedom was permitted in the cultural field (such 
as schools and language), in the economic field a system of exploitation 
was embarked upon. An illustration of this tendency may be seen in the 
decree-law of May 19, 1941, establishing Italian monopoly services in 
this province. 15 

As regards the legal system, the courts of original jurisdiction remain es¬ 
sentially unchanged, but appeals from these courts, in so far as they were 

ulee quotation 5 from Stajerski Gospodar , in Joseph Kalmer, “Slovenes and Slovenia," 
Free Europe , Vol. 5, No. 68 ‘(June 19, 1942), P- 202. 

» See below, p. 5 * 4 - ^ beIow ’ p * 58 $‘ 



directed previously to the Court of Appeals of Zagreb (now the capital of 
Croatia) have been transferred to the Court of Appeals in Fiume (on Italian 
territory). Because cases arising in the Slovene territory require a particu¬ 
lar knowledge of local law, a special branch for the appeal of cases from the 
province of Ljubljana has been created within the Court of Appeals in 
Fiume. 16 

II. Dalmatia 
(Italian Occupation) 

The territories along the Adriatic known as Dalmatia, as well as most of 
the Adriatic islands, with the exception of Pag, Bra£, and Hvar, were an¬ 
nexed by Italy. 17 Dalmatia was organized as a province with the capital in 
Zadar (Zara). By the proclamation of Mussolini of July 11, 1941, 18 a gov¬ 
ernorship for Dalmatia was created and Giuseppe Bastianini, Italian Under 
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, was appointed first governor and made directly 
responsible to the Duce. Italian currency 19 and various Italian economic 
laws were introduced gradually into Dalmatia. 

On the annexation of Dalmatia, the former Croat administrative authori¬ 
ties were replaced by Italians. All municipal councils were dismissed and 
Italian commissioners appointed instead. Croat schools were gradually 
changed into Italian and Italian teachers were imported from Italy. In the 
political, social, and economic field Fascist institutions were introduced. 20 
The Italian policy in Dalmatia was based upon the idea of keeping both 
shores of the Adriatic under control by elements upon which Italy could 

By the proclamation of the Duce of April 29, 1941, 21 tariffs and customs 
laws in force at the time of occupation remained unchanged, but this provi¬ 
sion refers only to trade other than that between the occupied territories 
and the Italo-Albanian Customs Union. No customs duties are to be paid 
on goods originating in and shipped from the area of the Italo-Albanian 
Union into the occupied territories, or on goods shipped from those territories 
into the area of the Italo-Albanian Union or into the free zones of Carnaro 
and Zara. 

The manner in which the local population was treated by the Italians is 
shown in a letter of protest sent to the Vatican by the Catholic Bishop Josip 
Srebrenic in Dalmatia. The Bishop charges the Italian authorities with mis- 

14 See proclamation of June 2, 1941, below, p. 586. 

17 See decree of May 18, 1941, below, p. 587; Free Europe, Vol. 4, No. 53 (November 14, 
1941), p. 274. 

lB Gazzet!a uficiale, 1941, No. 197. 

19 See proclamation of April 16, 1941, below, p. 577. 

10 Marko Pavi 5 i< 5 , “Italian Barbarities in Dalmatia and Croatia,” The Central European 
Observer, September 4, 1942, p. 283. 

11 See below, p. 573. 



treating the Croatian population, shooting people without trial after hav¬ 
ing drawn them by lot from a crowd, and burning houses of tnnocen 

inhabitants. 21 * 

III. Montenegro 
(Italian Occupation) 

Montenegro, or Crna Gora, which existed as a separate state before and 
during the first World War, was absorbed by Yugoslavia (then the Kingdom 
of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes) after 1918. When the Italian forces 
occupied Montenegro, it was planned that this area should receive specia 
treatment, involving not only military aspects but diplomatic aspects a* 
well, as became obvious when Mussolini, in issuing a proclamation appoint 
ing a High Commissioner for the Montenegrin territory, ordered such com 
missioner, in his exercise of civilian authority, to communicate directly wit 1 
the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs. Two underlying factors no dou )t 
had a bearing on these arrangements: on the one hand, there had existed 
traditionally well-established relations between the last King of Monte¬ 
negro, Nicholas, and the Royal House of Savoy because Victor Emmanuel 
married the daughter of Nicholas; and, on the other hand, the fact that 
Montenegro was abolished as a state and absorbed into the Kingdom of 
Yugoslavia was sufficient to cause the Italian occupant to treat it in a 
more favorable way. 

For these reasons, therefore, a certain hesitancy was manifested in the 
policy of the occupant as to the status of Montenegro. At the beginning the 
tendency was marked not to apply to Montenegro the basic Italian decree on 
military occupation of May 17, 1941. In particular, the decree of July 26, 
1941,2a provided that the Supreme Command could, for the territory of Mon¬ 
tenegro, refrain from establishing a civil commissioner, as provided for in 
other territories. However, in a later decree of October 3, 194 1 > 23 creating a 
governorship for Montenegro, the Governor was empowered to establish a 
civil commissariat headed by a civil commissioner. Thus the organization 
of Montenegro in the terms of. the latter decree is as follows: It is headed by a 
Governor, who reports on political, civil, and administrative matters to the 
Minister of Foreign Affairs (which shows that Montenegro represents special 
political aspects). The handling of these matters is entrusted to the civil 
commissioner, who reports to the Governor in Cetinje. As to military mat¬ 
ters, the Governor communicates with the Supreme Command. 

s» This letter stresses the following point: “Yes, it is true that the German Nazis too com¬ 
mit such acts, but they profess pagan and materialistic ideas whereas both the Italian army 
and the Italian people are faithful Catholics.”—Letter of Josip Srebrenic, Catholic Bishop 
of the Island of Krk, Italian occupied Dalmatia, sent on June 14, 1942, to Luigi Maglione, 
Secretary of State of the Holy See. Inter-AUied Review, Vol. II, No. 12 (December 15, 
1942), pp. 33 I *^ 2 - 

22 Gazzctta ufficiah , 194c No. l 8 5 . P* 3 * 43 - 

23 See below, p. 590. 



By the proclamation of October 6, 1941, Italian legal tender was intro¬ 
duced and dinars were exchanged by a special committee at the rate of 38 
lire for 100 dinars. 24 

IV. Serbia 
(German Occupation) 

In the process of disintegration Serbia was left with 4,500,000 inhabitants 

28 per cent of the population of the original Kingdom of Yugoslavia—and 
was subjected to German military occupation. In this German-controlled 
territory, a Serbian puppet government was established under General 
Nedi£, who acts through his ministers and local Serbian authorities. The 
ministers are called commissarial directors of the ministries. 


The German administration is in the hands of a German military com¬ 
mander and local military commanders. The German military commander 
supervises the Serbian Government and local authorities. However, the 
German occupation authorities are themselves legislating extensively, their 
legislation aiming at the complete political, economic, and social subordina¬ 
tion of Serbia to the occupant. The Serbian puppet government is also is¬ 
suing orders and decrees. 


As the territory has not yet been completely subdued, the Partisans and 
the army of General Mikhailovid continuing to fight, the German occupant 
has met this resistance by the creation of a semilegal system of terror. 
German military courts with vast powers have been introduced. In one 
of the first decrees promulgated by the German Commander in Chief of the 
Army in the Vcrordnungsblatt for the occupied Yugoslav territories, it was 
stated: “Any person who commits an act punishable according to German 
law and is brought to trial before courts of the armed forces, shall be subject 
to German criminal law.”** Thus a foreign legal code of the greatest com¬ 
plexity was introduced in the first days of occupation, and it took effect 
immediately without giving the population an opportunity to become ac¬ 
quainted with it. In this connection one must distinguish between the pro¬ 
mulgation of a particular order issued in the language of the local popu¬ 
lation and a reference made in a specific order to the legal code of the home 
country of the occupant which is unknown to the population of the occupied 
country. Whereas in the first case it is possible for the population to become 
14 Guzzctta ufficiale, 1941, No. 241, p. 4035. 

See order concerning the application of German criminal law and criminal statutes in 
the occupied Yugoslav territories, below, p. 597. 


acquainted with the law and act accordingly, in the second case the popula¬ 
tion has no opportunity to obtain exact knowledge of what is right and what 
is wrong under the code. Moreover, the above-mentioned order also gave the 
German courts jurisdiction to impose punishment for acts committed before 
the German occupation, prosecution of such offenses to be at the discretion 
of the prosecuting authorities.” Ihus the occupant has created a state of 
legal uncertainty and constant fear among the local inhabitants, who have 
been made completely dependent on the occupant for a determination of the 
consequences of their acts. The Hague Regulations endeavored to create 
a rule of law to be applied in occupied territories, but the German occupant 
has established instead a state of facts and force, using legal channels only as 
an instrumentality of administrative coercion. Therefore, one must con¬ 
sider the above-mentioned order a most flagrant violation of both the letter 
and spirit of the Hague Regulations. 


In the same spirit was conceived an order concerning the confiscation of 
property for activities hostile to the state, dated December 22, 1941, which 
gives to the chief of the administrative staff of the German military com¬ 
mander in Serbia the right to “decide by order, without formal judicial pro¬ 
cedure: (a) on the penalty of confiscation, ( b ) on the use to be made of the 
property thus confiscated.” Not only is the property of the defendant liable 
to confiscation but also the property of the members of his family—a pro¬ 
cedure which creates possibility of punishing persons without establishing 
their individual guilt. 26 


Anti-guerrilla legislation was introduced to cope with the Partisans and with 
the Chetniks of General Mikhailovid. As the guerrilla fighters used corn¬ 
fields extensively for hiding places, the German military commander issued an 
order on October 9, 1941, providing for an early harvesting of the corn and the 
cutting of the cornstalks. Not only the persons in possession of the corn¬ 
fields and their owners but also the mayors having jurisdiction in the re¬ 
spective localities were made responsible for the early harvesting of the crops. 
Non-compliance with this order was punishable by death or, under extenuat¬ 
ing circumstances, by hard labor. 27 


To the same extent as in other occupied countries legislation regarding ra¬ 
cial discrimination was introduced. The fate of the Jews was shared in Yu- 

( goslavia by the gypsies, both being excluded from practising professions. 

The liquidation of the Jews—an essential element of German policy—was of 
* See below, p. 598. 17 See below, p. 602. 



primary importance in Serbia. Accordingly, the Serbs were forbidden to 
help Jews by the order of December 22, 1941, which provided the death pen¬ 
alty for sheltering or hiding Jews or for accepting from them objects of value 
of any description, such as furniture and money, or even for buying such 
objects from them. 28 Jewish accounts in the banks were blocked (see below). 


By the decree of May 29, 1941, 29 the military commander in Serbia ordered 
the liquidation of the National Bank of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, and the 
German Plenipotentiary for Economic Affairs in Serbia was entrusted with the 
execution of this liquidation decree. Two days later a decree was published 
establishing a new Serbian National Bank as the bank of issue, with an initial 
capital of 100 million Serbian dinars, divided into 10,000 shares of 10,000 
Serbian dinars each. It was stated in this decree that the shares should be 
paid up at least 50 per cent at the time of subscription. As in other banks 
of issue created under German occupation, it was provided in this decree 
that the clearing debts in favor of Serbia should serve also as one of the 
cover items for the new issue. 30 The creation of huge clearing debts through 
overimportation from occupied countries is one of the exploitation devices of 
the German occupant. Thus one exploitation device is being used by the 
occupant for double exploitation purposes. The German Plenipotentiary 
for Economic Affairs has been given a decisive role in the organization of the 
new bank. He appoints the governor of the bank and his deputies, as well 
as a governing board consisting of ten persons. The German commissioner 
appointed by the economic plenipotentiary is attached to the administration 
of the bank in order to report on its activities to the economic plenipotentiary. 

I he new currency, called the Serbian dinar, was divided into 100 para. 
In addition the bank was permitted to issue a subsidiary currency in the form 
of coins not exceeding twenty Serbian dinars. It was stated that the total 
amount of the subsidiary currency may not exceed 250 dinars per head of the 

I he opening business of the new Serbian issue bank was the exchange of 
all Yugoslav dinar notes and Reich Credit Institute notes for new Serbian 
dinars, the state handing over to the bank all debt certificates to the amount 
of the notes exchanged. The fact that the new bank was compelled to call 
in and to exchange the Reich Credit notes issued by the German occupation 
troops has imposed a new and heavy burden upon Serbia. 31 

On May 29, 1941, a decree was published freezing all balances in the 
banks and allowing payments only according to special schedule. 32 Where 
the balance of the account was not more than 2,000 dinars, the whole 

” See below, p. 601. See below, p. 600. *° See above, chapter on “Finance." 

Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report (1942), p. 204. 

Verordnungshlatt des Mtlitdrbeft'hlshahers tn Scrbien, May 31, 1941. 



amount could be repaid. For other amounts monthly payments were pro¬ 
vided for according to the following schedule.* 

For a balance of from 2,000 to 25,000 dinars, a monthly repayment of 

3,000 dinars; .. 

From 25,000 to 50,000, a monthly repayment of 4,000 dinars; 

From 50,000 to 100,000, a monthly repayment of 5,000 dinars; 

From 100,000 to 250,000, a monthly repayment of 6,000 dinars; 

And for amounts of more than 250,000, a monthly repayment ot 7,000 

Balances belonging to Jews were blocked completely. 

V. The Banat 
(German Occupation) 

A part of the Danube Province with a considerable German population, 33 
descendants of those who had come as immigrants from the Rhine provinces, 
from Bavaria, and from Alsace under Maria Theresa, was organized by the 
German occupant as a separate administrative unit called the Banat. Be¬ 
cause the Banat forms only a part of the territory of the Danube Province, it 
is headed by a Vice Governor, with the title of Vize-Banus (“ Banus” is the 
title of the Governor). The office of the Vice Governor is formally sub¬ 
ordinated to the Ministry of the Interior within the puppet government in 
Belgrade. The Banat is divided into the following administrative districts: 
PanCevo, VrSac, Bela Crkva, Kovin, Ja$a Tomi6, Veliki Beckerek, Velika 
Kikinda, Novi Becej, Nova Kanjiza, KovaSica, and Alibunar, as well as the 
city of PanCevo. The higher officials in the Banat are appointed by the 
puppet government in Belgrade, on recommendation of the Vice Governor. 

The administration of the Banat is mainly in the hands of local Germans, 
from the Vice Governor down to the lower officials. The requirements of the 
existing Civil Service Code have been lowered in order to enable great num¬ 
bers of local Germans to procure civil service appointments. Judges and 
notaries public are Germans. 

The administration of posts, railways, and finance, and of the other 
branches is also in the hands of local Germans. Taxes and revenues in the 
territory of the Banat go to the central Treasury in Serbia, but the revenues 
from provincial taxes and duties are used for the needs of the provincial 

As the major part of the population of the Banat is Serbian, both German 
and Serbian are the official languages. 84 

The civil administration of the Banat being in the hands of local Germans, 
there are also in this territory German military forces under a German 
military commander. 

M Numbering about one third. 

44 See ordinance concerning the internal administration of the Banat, below, p. 602. 




Apparently the Germans do not consider the situation in the Banat as 
definitely settled. 36 

VI. The State of Croatia 

When German troops entered Zagreb three days after the broadcast 
by Ante Pavelid on April 8, 1941, referred to above, Kvaternik pro¬ 
claimed Croatia a free and independent state. This state was to have a 
population of around six million and a half, including about two million 


On April 11, 1941, Kvaternik, as Deputy Chief of State, ordered that until 
the establishment of the government of the State of Croatia its administra¬ 
tive affairs should be “discharged by the divisional offices of the Provincial 
Government of Croatia.” 36 In the meantime Pave lid had arrived in Zagreb, 
and, after issuing a proclamation as Chief of the new state ( Poglavnik), estab¬ 
lished the first Croatian government by decree of April 16, 1941. 37 This 
government consisted of Pavelid as presiding minister and at the same time 
Minister of Foreign Affairs, of a Vice President, and of a Commander of the 
Armed Forces and Minister of Defense (Kvaternik, who was also appointed 
Deputy of the Chief of State). By the same decree there were created the 
offices of Minister of Justice, of the Interior, of Public Health, of National 
Economy, of Religion and Education (one ministry), of Forestry and Mines 
(one ministry), and of Corporations; in addition, the decree established a 
Legislative Committee with a president appointed by Pavelid. 


On April 15 Germany and Italy granted recognition to Croatia. The 
Croatian State was subsequently recognized by Hungary and Slovakia 
(April i6), Bulgaria (April 22), Rumania (May 7), and Japan (June 7). 38 

On May 18, 1941, three agreements were signed in Rome by Italy and 
Croatia: a treaty fixing the frontier.^ between Croatia and Italy, a military 
agreement, and a treaty of guaranty and collaboration which was to last 
twenty-five years. 39 By the terms of the latter treaty Italy guaranteed the 
political independence and territorial integrity of Croatia, while in order to 

* It is reported that Hitler intends to create a Donaustaat in which he would settle Ger¬ 
man minorities living in Hungary, Rumania, and Croatia. In that case, the whole of the 
Banat, including the Rumanian part, would become a kind of Balkan East Prussia. Free 
hurope, November 14, 1941. 

M See below, p. 606. ” See below, p. 606. 

" York Times, April 17, t9 4 r, p. 8; May 8, p. 13; June 8, p. 16. 

* New York Tunes, May 19, 1941, p. 1, col. 6; Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, 
N°. 26 (December 27, 1941), pp. 2009-10. A German-Croatian Treaty had been signed on 
Alay 13 fixing the boundaries between Germany and Croatia. See ibid., p. 2009. 



safeguard the “protective” rights of Italy Croatia obligated itself not to 
contract any obligations incompatible with such guaranties. The treaty 
also stressed the aim of both parties to enter into fuller and closer relationship 
in customs and currency affairs, and provided for future agreements on other 
matters of mutual interest. It would seem, however, that the military 
clauses, taken in conjunction with the military agreement of the same date, 
were actually the provisions of a determining character in the treaty; in fact 
the intent of those provisions was to put the “independent” Croatian State 
in a position of complete military dependence on Italy. In Article 3 of the 
treaty, the Croatian Government declared that it would use Italians in the 
organization and instruction of its armed forces as well as in the establish¬ 
ment of the military defenses of the country. The military agreement pro¬ 
vided that the Dalmatian shore and islands of the Croatian State were not to 
be fortified (Article 1), which means that in military matters Italy was to 
have a free hand in relation to Croatia. This presumption is strengthened 
by the provisions of the agreement that Croatia was not to have a navy— 
except for specialized units necessary for police and customs services (Article 
2)—and that Italy should have the right of military transit across Croatian 
territory. 40 Following the signing of the treaties on May 18, King Victor 
Emmanuel, on the request of Paveli6, designated his nephew, Aimone 
Savoy-Aosta, Duke of Spoleto, to be King of Croatia, and in Rome the latter 
was proclaimed King in the presence of Paveli6 and one hundred Croat 
delegates. However, he never assumed his functions. 41 


The Council of State was created as a substitute for parliament. The 
decree on its establishment, dated January 24, 1942, 42 is based upon two 
premises: (1) that although the Croatian State w*as dissolved centuries ago, 
the national traditions lasted throughout the centuries and there is a his¬ 
torical constitutional law which affords a basis for the present constitution 
of the Independent State of Croatia; (2) that not only the UstaSe movement 
but also other political groups and persons who were active in the cause of 
Croatian independence are responsible for the activities of the Council of 
State. Apparently the rulers of Croatia wished to be able to present evi¬ 
dence in the future that the creators of independent Croatia were acting not 
on a narrow but on a broader national basis, particularly in the formation of 

40 Angelo Piero Sereni, “The Status of Croatia under International Law,” American Po¬ 
litical Science Review, VoL XXXV (1941), p. 1147. 

41 New York Times, May 19, 1941, p. 1, col. 6; Bulletin of International News, Vol. XVIII, 
No. 26 (December 27, 19.11), p. 2010. 

On orders from King Victor Emmanuel, the Duke of Aosta (formerly Duke of Spoleto) 
resigned the throne of Croatia on July 31, 1943. He is “reliably reported not to have wanted 
the Croatian throne, and he never visited the state from the time of its founding. . . .”— 
New York Times, August 1, 1943, p. 3. 

43 See below, p. 608. 



the first Council of State. 48 In this broader basis of the Croatian Council of 
State it was deemed necessary to include surviving representatives—Croats 
—of the last Croatian Diet of 1918, surviving representatives—Croats—of 
the SkupStina (parliament in Belgrade) elected in 1938, the founders and life 
members of the Central Committee of the former Croatian Agrarian Party, 
and members of the council of the former Party for the Acquisition of Rights 
for the Croats, elected in 1919. Because of Axis affiliations, representatives 
of the German national minority were accorded the right to send their rep¬ 
resentatives to the first Council of State. According to Section 5 of the 
decree members of the Council of State enjoy rights of immunity. The 
president of the Supreme Court is charged with the execution of the decree 
(Section 7). By including a provision on rights of immunity, an endeavor 
was made to create the impression that the Council of State is a parliament 
in the strict sense of the word. 


The main political feature of the new state is the monoparty system and 
the exclusion of other parties. The only party entitled to represent the po¬ 
litical idea of Croatia is the UstaSe Party. This party, as mentioned above, 
proclaimed the independence of Croatia by revolutionary means. It is a 
radical, nationalistic movement with socialistic inclinations. Labor is pro¬ 
claimed as a basis for any reward. The party consists of adult members and 
special youth groups. However, two additional elements are involved, the 
union of professional organizations and special party guard UstaSe troops, 
which represent the executive element of the party. 44 


The religion of the predominant part of the Croat population is Roman 
Catholic, while the Serbs included within the boundaries of the new state 
belong to the Serb Orthodox Church. Before the dismemberment of Yugo¬ 
slavia all Serbs belonging to the Orthodox faith were united in the Eastern 
Orthodox Church with headquarters in Belgrade. After the creation of 
the new state, the Croatian authorities looked unwillingly at the fact that 
their own citizens might seek religious leadership in a foreign country and 
hence they were eager to sever relations between their new citizens and the 
Eastern Orthodox Church in Belgrade. Therefore a Croatian Orthodox 
Church was established in the territory of Croatia by the law of April 3, 
I942. a A little later a special statute was enacted for the new Croatian 
Orthodox Church. 46 1 1 is declared in this statute that the Croatian Orthodox 

u However, it should not be overlooked that the r6gime in Croatia is based upon a single 
party, representing the Ustase liberation movement, and that the admission of other persons 
to the Council of State can be treated only as an exception serving a specific purpose. 

44 See regulations of August 11, 1942, below, p. 611. 

tt See below, p. 617. 49 June 5, 1942, ibid. 



Church is indivisible in its unity, that it is autocephalous, and that it shall 
be guided dogmatically and canonically by the principles of the Holy Eastern 
Orthodox Church. The new church was given the status of a patriarchy, 
with its seat at Zagreb. 

The language of the Eastern Orthodox Church of \ ugoslavia since 19*8, 
and in former times back to the earliest days, had been Serbian. The 
lettering in its literature and other written materials had also been Serbian 
(Cyrillic alphabet). Despite this, the above-mentioned statute declared 
that the official language as well as the official lettering of the Croatian 
Orthodox Church should be Croatian, which, in the existing circum¬ 
stances, must be felt by the Serbs to be an infringement upon their 

In order to connect the new church officially and visually with the new 
state, it was provided that the flag of the church should have the colors of 
the Croatian state (red, white, and blue). 

As already noted, it was officially declared in the statute that the new 
church is autocephalous, but this autonomy is illusory when one considers 
the complete subordination of the clergy to the state in matters of appoint¬ 
ments as well as of financial support. Thus, as regards the procedure for 
appointments, a Council of Electors is established, consisting of all bishops 
of the new church, of a government official (the Chief of the Eastern Ortho¬ 
dox Division in the Ministry of Justice and Cults), of the Dean of the 
Orthodox Faculty of the University of Zagreb, and of five members of the 
Eastern Orthodox Church appointed for each election by the chief of the 
state, upon the recommendation of the Ministry of Justice and Cults. The 
bishops themselves are to be appointed by the chief of the state, upon the 
recommendation of the Minister of Justice and Cults, from among three 
candidates presented by the Synod of Bishops. In order to elect the 
Patriarch of the church, the Council of Electors must nominate from among 
the bishops three candidates, whose names must be presented to the chief 
of the state through the Minister of Justice and Cults. Thus it is the chief 
of the state who has the final decision in the matter of appointments of 
the bishops and of the Patriarch. According to Section 116 the chief of 
the state shall himself directly appoint the first Patriarch and the first 

As to the financial status of the church, it should be stated that the 
religious officers of the church are paid by the state in the same manner as 
government officials and that their civil service ratings are determined in 
accordance with the general principles of the Croatian Civil Service. The 
money for the expenses of the church is collected by local tax authorities 
from parishes of the Croatian Orthodox Church. Later the Treasury passes 
on the payments to the church authorities. Thus the new church is made 
dependent financially as well as otherwise on the Croatian State. 




The labor legislation of Croatia stresses the importance of labor in society. 
The law regulating labor relations 47 proclaimed that “it is the right*and 
duty of every citizen to work, and work alone should be the basis of his 
existence and the measure of his usefulness.” The state has the right to 
supervise not only the nature of work but also wages. Moreover, penalties 
are imposed for workers’ failures in accomplishment and for actions making 
work impossible or difficult. Both employers and employees are called 
upon to conduct their mutual relations primarily “upon the principle of the 
welfare of the nation and the state as a whole,” and only secondarily 

with regard to individual profit.” However, collective bargaining is per¬ 

The Croatian Union of Workers was established as a professional organ¬ 
ization of workers covering all fields of labor in Croatia. According to the 
statute of the Croatian Union of Workers, 48 this union is a part of the UstaSe 
liberation movement. It embraces all workers and their societies and all 
trade unions, the highest office of the union being that of the leader, who is 
appointed by the government. Thus the workers are controlled politically 
by the UstaSe Party and in an administrative way by their leader, a govern¬ 
ment appointee. As not only labor but also all trades and economic activ¬ 
ities are controlled by the government, it is thus possible for the government 
to exercise a decisive control over both employers and employees and to 
decide their disputes by fiat. 


On April r8,1942, 49 a Fascist corporate system was introduced. The pur¬ 
pose of this decree was to seize and develop the national resources, to organ¬ 
ize and protect trades, and to eliminate competition in economic activities. 
The underlying aim is to strengthen the nation and the state. The decree 
provides for the establishing of chambers of handicrafts, industry, commerce, 
and banking and insurance throughout all the country. All the chambers 
arc to be supervised by the Minister of Handicrafts, Industry, and Com¬ 
merce. No person can engage in economic activities without having a trade 
license or membership in a particular chamber. Even governmental enter¬ 
prises and establishments and enterprises belonging to the local government 
must also be members of the respective chambers. The chambers are re¬ 
quired to organize a regular association under the name, “Representatives 
of Croatian Trade Chambers,” to serve as a consultative body to the govern¬ 

Besides the trade chambers, professional associations are also to be estab¬ 
lished under this law. 

47 See law of April 30, 1942, below, p. 624. 

48 Dated January 23, 1942. See below, p. 623. 49 See decree of that date, below, p. 609. 


The Minister of Handicrafts, Industry, and Commerce and the Minister 
of Finance are charged with the execution of the law, and the former is au¬ 
thorized “to amend, change, correct, abolish, and interpret” all rules and 
regulations issued thereunder, and to issue new ones. 


When the territory of Croatia was a part of the Yugoslav Kingdom, the 
Supreme Court of Yugoslavia was the highest court of the whole kingdom. 
After the creation of the Independent State of Croatia, a Supreme Court for 
the entire Croatian territory was established in Bania Luca. 60 At the same 
time the office of a national Attorney General was established in Bania Luca, 
as well as offices of state attorneys in Zagreb and Sarajevo. The Supreme 
Court in Bania Luca has final jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases as well 
as in non-trial cases. This court has one president, one vice president, and 
an appropriate number of judges. The president—or in his absence the vice 
president—is vested with power to suspend any decision of individual 
benches in civil cases, “if such decision is in contradiction to previous impor¬ 
tant or basic decisions of the Supreme Court” or “in obvious contradiction to 
the contents of the record in the case, or if it is in obvious violation of the law.” 
The same decree states that “whenever the president exercises this right, the 
case must be brought before the plenary session of the Supreme Court.” 
However, there is no statement to the effect that the plenary session may 
overrule the president. 


On July 20, 1942, 61 a law was published concerning the suppression “of 
violent crimes against the state, individuals, and property.” This law pro¬ 
vides for special treatment of political and certain common criminals. It 
does not, however, define in a detailed manner the offenses for which especially 
harsh treatment is established, but speaks generally of persons “who violate 
public order and safety or threaten the peace and quiet of the Croatian peo¬ 
ple, or who undertake some violent crime against the state, individuals, or 
property.” For such crimes two types of treatment were introduced: (i) 
confinement in concentration camps for a period of not less than three 
months nor more than three years; and (2) confiscation of property. Al¬ 
though the law provides for deprivation of liberty and property, it is not car¬ 
ried out by way of judicial procedure but merely by a division of the Minis¬ 
try of the Interior designated as “Administration of Public Order and 
Safety.” A peculiar provision states that if the culprits have fled, the mem¬ 
bers of their families may be confined in concentration camps and their prop¬ 
erty confiscated. This provision is in contradiction to the principle of 
individual responsibility under modern criminal law. However, the most 
80 See law of January 7 1942, below, p. 614. 81 See below, p. 615 



drastic penal law was published on April 17, 1941 « This law imposes the 
death penalty for the most serious political crimes. The acts for which 
that penalty may be imposed, however, are defined quite vaguely, namely, 
as harm done “to the honor and vital interests of the Croatian nation ” or as 
acts endangering the “existence of the Independent State of Croatia or its 
government authorities.” These cases are tried by extraordinary People’s 
Courts, consisting of three judges, applying a summary procedure. 


An especially severe regime for property was established in Croatia. 
Transactions of transfer and mortgaging of real property may take place only 
with the permission of the Minister of Justice. 63 

According to the law of August 2, 1941, practically every productive es¬ 
tablishment may be expropriated “whenever necessary for the needs of the 
state and nation.” 64 Of especial political importance is the law concerning 
investigation of the origin of property and the forfeiture of property illegally 
acquired. 66 This law is directed mainly against statesmen (ministers, repre¬ 
sentatives, or senators) who have collaborated with the Yugoslav Govern¬ 
ment, and its aim is to deprive such persons of their property. A National 
Committee for Investigation of the Origin of Property was created, and min¬ 
isters, representatives, or senators who occupied their respective offices 
during the period from December 1, 1918, to April 10, 1941, must, in accord¬ 
ance with Section 1 of this law, submit to such committee “a declaration 
concerning the status and origin of their property and of that of their wives 
and children.” This committee has also the right to ask any Croatian na¬ 
tional or citizen to submit within one month of the effective date of the law 
a statement regarding the status and origin of his property and of that of his 
wife and children. According to Section 6, paragraph 2, it is assumed that 
property was acquired illegally “if it is in obvious and considerable dis¬ 
proportion to the plausible income of the suspected person, his wife and chil¬ 
dren, and to their expenses; or if he acquired the property through the 
use of political or family influence, by intermediation with the national or 
local authorities.” 

This decree operates on the presumption that the property was acquired 
illegally; and the person called upon has the burden of proof to the contrary. 

If the proof fails, the property in question is condemned by the committee 
to be transferred to the Treasury or to persons or institutions which were 
injured “by such illegal acquisition.” 


By the decree of May 10, 1941, a Croatian State Bank was established in 
Zagreb as the bank of issue. A new monetary unit was introduced for Croa- 

»*See below, p. 613. “See decree-law of April 18, 1941, below, p. 620. 

See below, p. 620. ' w See law of August 30, 1941, below, p. 621. 



tia, namely, the kuna. The kuna contains 100 banica. It was stated that 
the value of the kuna should be 17,921 milligrams of fine gold. The Croa¬ 
tian State Bank was authorized to exchange at par dinar notes of 1,000, 500, 
100, and 50 denomination of the former National Bank of the Kingdom of 
Yugoslavia for new bank notes issued by the bank of the Independent State 
of Croatia. 68 

The Croatian State Bank has a share capital of 300 million kuna divided 
into 60,000 shares, to be registered in the names of the holders and to be held 
only by Croat nationals. The notes of the bank are to be covered by gold, 
foreign exchange, bills, checks, securities, and debt certificates representing 
the liabilities taken over from the Yugoslav National Bank. The authorities 
of the bank consist of a president, a vice president, and three directors ap¬ 
pointed for three years by the chief of the state. Two more directors and a 
board of governors, consisting of five persons, are elected by the share¬ 
holders. 67 


Genocide policy is directed predominantly against Jews and Serbs. 

a) Jews. Even in the first stage of the formation of the state a differentia¬ 
tion in treatment of the population was introduced in accordance with the 
racial principles laid down in the German Nuremberg legislation. Accord¬ 
ing to the German pattern heretofore described, nationality was divided into 
two classifications. The higher type created a full right of relationship be¬ 
tween individual and state and was granted only to persons of Aryan origin. 68 
I he inferior type of nationality does not confer rights to participate in po¬ 
litical life but does give a certain protection to the person involved, such as 
the right to be granted a passport and the right to participate in economic 
activities within certain limitations. This latter type of nationality is 
grantee! to Jews and even to non-Jews who are not considered as completely 
reliable politically. 

In Croatia Jewish property was seized. By a decree-law of April 14, 1941, 
all transactions between Jews and between Jews and third parties entered 
into within two months before the independence of the State of Croatia was 
proclaimed, were to be declared null and void if the value thereof exceeded 
100,000 dinars. 69 This law was later made applicable to legal transactions 
entered into after independence was proclaimed. 

Several other limitations relating to the exercise of professions and eco¬ 
nomic activities have reduced the Jewish population in Croatia to a state of 

b ) Serbs. The Serbian population living in Croatia is affected mainly in 
its political and cultural aspects. Its national pattern is being destroyed by 

“See below, p. 622; see also decree-law of July 7, 1941, ibid. 

87 Bank for International Settlements, Press Reviews, May 17 1 tut Issue oc n 1 

88 See law of April 30, 1941, below, p. 626. h See beiow,p. 625 5 ’ P ‘ 



genocide legislation. Since the main difference between the Serbian and 
Croatian languages consists in the use by the Croats of the Roman lettering 
and by the Serbs of the Cyrillic lettering, the use of the latter has been pro¬ 
hibited. By this prohibition the Serbs are practically obliged to use the 
Croatian language in writing. 60 If one considers that the Cyrillic lettering 
is an essential part of the ritual of the Eastern Orthodox Church, one must 
conclude that the compulsion as to the use of the Roman lettering amounts 
to interference with religion. 

It is reported that the Serbian population in Croatia is being subjected to 
massacres and tortures. Allegedly several hundred thousand Serbs have 
been killed by the Usta§e. fl0a 

VII. Kossovo, Dibrano, and Struga 
(Albanian Occupation) 

On June 9, 1940, 61 King Victor Emmanuel promulgated a royal decree to 
the effect that the Kingdom of Albania considered itself at war with those 
states with which the Kingdom of Italy was at war. By the same decree the 
Albanian Fascist Militia and Forestry Militia and the Armed Police Force 
and all other Albanian armed units were put under the orders of the Supreme 
Commander of the Italian Armed Forces. Thus Albania was automatically 
involved in the war with Yugoslavia when Italy started military action. 
It received for itself a part of the spoils of Yugoslavia. 

By the proclamation of Mussolini of June 29, 1941, 62 it was declared that 
in the territories of Kossovo, Dibrano, and Struga occupied by Italian forces 
in Yugoslavia, the rights of the military occupant are “transferred to the 
Albanian Government.” These territories were later annexed by the 
Albanian Government by the law of September 12, 1942, 63 and Albanian 
administration was introduced into them. 

A special Ministry for Redeemed Territories was created in Tirana, the 
capital of Albania, but was later abolished. 

On July 22, 1942, the Vicegerent published a decree establishing offices for 
public works in the redeemed territories at Prishtina, Peja, Dibrano, and 
Tetova. 64 

In these territories a genocide policy in relation to Serbs is being carried 
out. Yugoslav schools have been closed, with the exception of some 
schools belonging to Serbian religious bodies. In their stead Albanian 
schools have been opened. Those pupils of Albanian nationality who had 
previously attended the discontinued Yugoslav schools were given every fa- 

60 See decree of April 25, 1941, below, p. 626. 

«o» Martyrdom of the Serbs . Prepared and issued by the Serbian Eastern Orthodox 
Diocese for the United States and Canada (1943), passim. 
fll See below, p. 272. “See below, p. 627. 

M See below, p. 629. 44 See below, p. 629. 


cility to continue their studies in the new Albanian schools. The Minister of 
Education was empowered to take possession of the buildings and equip¬ 
ment, archives, and all scientific endowments of the former Yugoslav 
schools. 66 By so doing, the occupant has violated Articles 46 and 56 of the 
Hague Regulations, which prohibit the seizure of property of institutions 
dedicated to education and science. The discontinuance of the Yugoslav 
schools is also an encroachment upon the right to education, which is pro¬ 
tected by customs of international law and by the principles of humanity 
which form part of the Hague Regulations. 

The Albanian franc was made legal tender, and Yugoslav dinars were ex¬ 
changed at the rate of 6.08 Albanian francs for 100 dinars. For transactions 
in connection with conversion of currency, a special committee of three per¬ 
sons was created, of which the president is designated by the civil commis¬ 
sioner (Italian), one member is appointed by the National Bank of Albania, 
and the third is elected from among the population. 

As the Serbian population in the annexed territories displayed a hostile 
attitude toward the Albanian occupant, drastic measures were applied. 
There existed in Albania a law of 1930 providing for severe collective penal¬ 
ties for members of families of offenders in hiding. These penalties included 
the internment of families, sequestration of property, and setting fire to the 
houses of culprits. This law has a special practical importance in these areas, 
where hiding in the mountains is prevalent. The penalties imposed upon 
the innocent members of families are intended to cause the culprits to leave 
their hiding places and appear before tribunals of justice. The Albanian oc¬ 
cupant proceeded to promulgate this law on collective penalties in the 
occupied areas. 66 The introduction of such a provision in occupied territory 
is a violation of Article 50 of the Hague Regulations, which prohibits the 
inflicting of collective penalties upon the population because of the acts of 
individuals, for which acts the population cannot be regarded as jointly and 
severally responsible. 

VIII. Baranja, Ba£ka, Prekomurje, and Med 2 umurje 
(Southern Territories) 

(Hungarian Occupation) 


After the Treaty of Trianon, Hungary claimed a revision of the frontiers 
with Yugoslavia, not only with a view to restoring Hungarian ethnographic 
regions but also regions which had belonged to Hungary in the past, such as 
Croatia. Here again, the doctrine of the Holy Crown 67 was invoked. 

“ See Vicegerent’s decree of November 12, 1941, below, p. 627. 

“See Vicegerent’s decree of October 2, 1942, extending law of August 29, 1930, to re¬ 
deemed territories, below, p. 630. 

17 See above, chapter on Czechoslovakia, section on the doctrine of the Holy Crown, p. 144. 



Therefore, during the intervening years the relations between the two 
countries were greatly strained and Hungary was often accused by Yugo¬ 
slavia of fostering separatist movements in Yugoslavia. In particular, 
charges were brought that the Hungarians were training Croatian terrorists 
in Hungary. A change in the relations of the two countries occurred on 
December 12, 1940, when their respective foreign ministers met in Belgrade 
and signed a treaty of perpetual amity. Article I of this treaty expressly 
provided: “Permanent peace will reign and eternal friendship will exist be¬ 
tween the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and the Kingdom of Hungary.” And 
Article II stated: “The Signatory parties agree to consult on all problems 
which, in their opinion, affect their mutual relations.” 68 

Four months later, during the German invasion of Yugoslavia in April, 
1941, Hungarian troops marched into Yugoslavia and occupied the regions 
of Medzumurje, Prekomurje, Baranja, and Backa. This occupation coin¬ 
cided with the proclamation of Croatia as an “independent” state. 69 


On December 27, 1941, the territories so occupied, referred to as “South¬ 
ern Territories,” were by law formally incorporated into Hungary. 70 As was 
the case with the Highland Territories and Subcarpathia, the law referred to 
the Hungarian Holy Crown as the legal entity into which the Southern Ter¬ 
ritories were incorporated, and thus in an official document gave expression 
anew to the doctrine of the Holy Crown. 


Law XX of 1941 provided for representation in Parliament of the incor¬ 
porated Southern Territories. However, during the period when the citi¬ 
zens* electors could not choose representatives “by normal procedure,” the 
members of the Upper House were to be nominated, on motion of the Prime 
Minister, by the Parliament, both houses concurring. Law XXI of 1942 71 
provided further that the county assemblies should elect representatives to 
the Upper House, the number of such members for every county and autono¬ 
mous city in the Southern Territories being fixed in advance. 72 


In the beginning these territories were administered by Hungarian military 
commanders of the occupying forces. Later on Hungarian civil administra¬ 
tion was extended to them. The Hungarian authorities have introduced a 

• 8 Hungaro-Yugoslav Treaty of Amity, December 12, 1940, printed in London Times, 
December 13, 1940, p. 3, col. 2. 

89 See above, section on Croatia, p. 252. 70 See Law XX, 194 1 * below, p. 631. 

71 See above, chapter on Czechoslovakia, p. 147. 

72 The above law provides material for comparison of the number of representatives fixed 
for the Southern Territories with the number of other counties in Hungary proper, as well 
as in the incorporated Highland Territories and Subcarpathia. 


genocide policy by endeavoring to impose a Hungarian pattern upon these 
territories. As Prekomurje and Medzumurje are inhabited also by Slovenes 
and Croats, the genocide policy affects those races; in Ba£ka and Baranja 

it affects the Serbs and Jews. . 

On May 6, 1942, the Yugoslav Government in London delivered to the 

Allied Governments a memorandum concerning mass destruction of the Ser¬ 
bian population in the occupied territories. In addition to the details con¬ 
cerning the many atrocities that had taken place under Hungarian occupa¬ 
tion, the memorandum stated that concentration camps had been estab¬ 
lished in every town, the largest being in Subotica, Novi Sad, Pechuj, and 
Baja. That of Novi Sad contained about 13,000 men, women and children, 
Serbs and Jews. The memorandum further charged that churches had been 
looted and destroyed and that the celebration of all Orthodox holy days was 
prohibited by the Hungarian authorities. 73 


According to Law XX, 1941, the inhabitants of the incorporated Southern 
Territories were given the right to reacquire Hungarian citizenship as from 
April 11, 1941, if they were beyond question Hungarian citizens on July 26, 
1921, under Hungarian law and became citizens of the Kingdom of the Serbs, 
Croats, and Slovenes by virtue of the Treaty of Trianon. Such persons 
must have lived continuously, however, in the incorporated Southern Terri¬ 
tories for ten years, that is, from June 1, 1931, to June 1, 1941. Persons 
who had exercised the right of option and obtained foreign citizenship are 
excluded from the benefits of this law. That the Hungarian Government 
apparently does not feel sure of the loyalty of the population in the Southern 
Territories is to be set n from the provision instituting a procedure for voiding 
citizenship granted under the above-mentioned law. This law states (Sec¬ 
tion 4) that citizenship ‘‘reacquired or acquired” may be recalled by the 
Minister of the Interior within five years from the effective date of the law, 
if the new citizen has during the period of separation from Hungary “seri¬ 
ously injured the interests of the Hungarian nation by a hostile attitude.” 


Serbian dinar notes and coins ceased to be legal tender on July 12, 1941, by 
which date all dinars had to be exchanged for pengo. The exchange rate 
was established of 1 pengb to 10 dinars. According to the twelfth Annual 
Report of the Bank of International Settlements, Hungary used about 191 
million pengo to replace the Yugoslav currency. 74 

73 See text of the memorandum in New York Times , May 19, 1942, p. 4, col. 1. See also 
Martyrdom of the Serbs. Prepared and Issued by the Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for 
the United States of America and Canada (Chicago, [1943I), PP- 265-68; Inter ‘Allied Review, 
Vol. II No. 5 (May 15, 1942), p. 102. 

74 See Bank for International Settlements, Twelfth Annual Report (194 2 ). P- 2 ° 9 - 



IX. Macedonia, Morava, Skoplje, and Bitolia Regions 
(Bulgarian Occupation) 

A considerable part of Yugoslavia was occupied also by Bulgaria. The 
occupied areas include the long-disputed territory of western Macedonia 
and the regions of Skoplje, Bitolia, and parts of the Morava regions. 
Different policies were adopted by the occupant in the respective regions. 
Macedonia, which had been claimed by Bulgaria for many years, was con¬ 
sidered after its occupation as Bulgarian territory returning to the homeland. 
Therefore a policy of rehabilitation and reconstruction was adopted there in 
relation to the Macedonians, who are considered by the Bulgarians as of 
Bulgarian origin. As to the other groups of the population, especially Serbs, 
a policy of national oppression (genocide) was adopted. From Macedonia 
120,000 Serbs were removed to Old Serbia. 75 In order to carry out the re¬ 
habilitation policy, a special budget was voted by the Sobranje in Sofia. 

Yugoslav administration was abolished and Bulgarian administration in¬ 
troduced in its stead. Because of an old feud between the Serbs and the Bul¬ 
garians in this region, most of the officials were superseded by Bulgarians. 

Yugoslav currency, the dinar, was replaced by the Bulgarian lev. 76 By 
Decision No. 2012 of the Council of Ministers, 77 all private persons and 
firms with domicile and residence in Macedonia, Morava, and the western 
regions were ordered to deposit, within fourteen days as from June 6, 1941, 
in the respective agencies of the Bulgarian National Bank, notes of one 
hundred dinars and higher denominations. It was declared that after the 
expiration of the period prescribed for deposits dinars would cease to be legal 

Decision No. 3121 of the Council of Ministers has temporarily frozen all 
bank accounts. Bank accounts were transferred from dinars into leva but 
payments were to be made only to persons of Bulgarian origin who had not 
emigrated from these regions during the year 1941. 78 In order to limit spend¬ 
ing of money and to check inflation, special arrangements were made as to 
repayment of deposits of Bulgarians. If the deposit amounted to less than 
2,000 leva, it was repaid immediately, but deposits above 2,000 leva were 
repaid in monthly instalments of 2,000 leva. 

All agricultural enterprises were ordered to declare the quantities of prod¬ 
ucts which they had harvested within the last year. 79 

n Kulischer, op. cit., p. 115. 71 The exchange rate adopted is unknown to the author. 

11 See below, p. 633. 78 See below, p. 635. 19 Durjaven Veslnik, No. 185, p. 3. 



Statutes, Decrees, and Other Documents 



Law No. 580 regarding Acceptance of the Crown of Albania by the King of 
Italy, Emperor of Ethiopia, April 16, 1939 1 

Victor Emmanuel III, by the grace of God and by the will of the People 
King of Italy, Emperor of Ethiopia. 

The Fascist Grand Council having expressed its opinion; 

The Senate and the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations having approved; 
We have authorized and we promulgate as follows: 

Article i. The King of Italy, having accepted the Crown of Albania, 
assumes for himself and his heirs the title of King of Italy and of Albania, 
Emperor of Ethiopia. 

Article 2. The King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor of Ethiopia, 
shall be represented in Albania by a Vicegerent, who shall reside in Tirana. 

We order that the present law, with the seal of the state affixed thereto, be 
inserted in the official collection of the laws and decrees of the Kingdom of 
Italy, and we direct whomsoever it may concern to obey it and cause it to 
be obeyed as a law of the state. 

Given in Rome this day, April 16, 1939-XVII. 


Seen: The Keeper of the Seal, Solmi. 

Decree concerning the Basic Statute of the Kingdom of Albania, 

June 3, 1939 2 

Victor Emmanuel III, by the grace of God and by the will of the People 
King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor of Ethiopia. 

In accepting the Crown of Albania, tendered by the Constitutional Assem¬ 
bly which met in Tirana on April 12, 1939-XVIL we have assumed the 
high duties of providing for the care of our Albanian sons and also of leading 
this noble People, renewed under the symbol of the Lictors, toward its highest 

1 Leggi e decreli, 1939, No. 580; published in the Gazelta ujficialc del Regno d*Italia, April 
19. 1939, No. 94. 

* Fletorja Zyrtare, 1939, No. 40, p. 1. 


268 documents: Albania 

Considering that to achieve these ends it is indispensable to determine the 
structure of the state in conformity with supreme national interests, we 
have decided to grant to our beloved Albanian People a basic statute, a 
token also of our affection and of our paternal solicitude. 

Inspired by these sentiments we have decreed and we decree: 



I. General Provisions 

Article i. The Albanian State shall be ruled by a constitutional 
monarchic government. 

The throne shall be hereditary, according to the Salic law, in the dynasty 
of His Majesty Victor Emmanuel III, King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor 
of Ethiopia. 

Article 2. The Albanian flag shall be red, bearing in the center the 
black double-headed eagle with the emblem of the Lictors' Fasces (Fascio 

Article 3. The official language of the state is Albanian. 

Article 4. All religions shall be respected. The free exercise of worship 
and of the outward practices thereof are guaranteed, in conformity with the 

Article 5. The legislative power shall be exercised by the King with the 
collaboration of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council. 

Article 6. The executive power shall belong to the King. 

Article 7. Justice shall emanate from the King and shall be admin¬ 
istered in his name by the judges whom he shall appoint. 

Article 8. The implementation of the laws, with the object of imposing 
obligation on all, shall lie exclusively with the legislative power. 

Article 9. The organization of communal and provincial institutions 
shall be established by law. 

II. The King 

Article 10. The person of the King shall be sacred and inviolable. 

Article ii. The King shall attain majority on completion of eighteen 
years of age. 

During the minority of the King, or in the event that the King, being of 
age, is incapable of reigning because of physical incapacity, the powers of 
the King shall be exercised by a regent. The regency will fall to the Regent 
of the Kingdom of Italy. 

Article 12. The King may appoint a Vicegerent (Ltiogotenente Generate). 

The Vicegerent shall exercise all the powers of the King, with the exception 
of those which the King shall expressly reserve to himself. 



Article 13. The King is the supreme head of the state; he commands the 
armed forces, declares war, concludes peace, and makes international 
treaties, giving notice thereof to the Fascist Upper Corporative Council, in 
so far as the interest and the security of the state permit. 

Article 14. The King shall make appointments to all the positions of 
the state. 

Article 15. The King shall promulgate the decrees and the regulations 
necessary to execute the laws, and to discipline the organization and func¬ 
tioning of the authorities of the state. 

When reasons of urgent and absolute necessity require it, the King may 
issue rules having the force of laws. In this case, the royal decree must be 
presented to the Fascist Upper Corporative Council for conversion into 

Article 16. The function of proposing laws shall belong to the King and 
to the. Fascist Upper Corporative Council. But the proposing of laws 
which are of a constitutional nature or which involve increases in expense 
shall rest with the King alone. 

Article 17. The King shall sanction laws and promulgate them. 

Article 18. The King may grant clemency and commute sentences. 

The Vicegerent shall exercise all the powers of the King, with the exception 
of those which the King shall expressly reserve to himself. 

Article 19. The King may create orders of knighthood and prescribe 
the statutes thereof. 

Article 20. The King may confer titles of nobility. 

Article 21. No one may receive decorations, titles, or pensions from a 
foreign power without the authorization of the King. 

III. The King's Government 

Article 22. The King shall appoint and dismiss his ministers of state. 
They shall be responsible for all the actions and measures taken by their 

Article 23. The King, should he consider it necessary, may convoke and 
preside over the Council of Ministers. 

Article 24. The ministers of state shall always have access to the Fascist 
Upper Corporative Council and must be heard on request. 

Article 25. The laws and acts of the government shall not be effective 
unless they bear the signature of a minister. 

IV. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council 

Article 26. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall be composed 
of members of the Central Council of the Albanian Fascist Party and of the 
active members of the Central Council of Corporative Economy. 



The composition of the Central Council of the Albanian Fascist Party 
and of the Central Council of Corporative Economy cannot be modified 
except by law. * 

Article 27. It is requisite that councillors [i.e., members of the Fascist 
Upper Corporative Council] shall: 

a) Have reached the age of 25 years. 

b) Enjoy civil and political rights. 

c) Comply with other requirements. 

Article 28. A committee composed of the president and the vice 
presidents of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall decide whether 
these requisites for the office of councillor have been fulfilled. 

Article 29. Before being admitted to the exercise of their official 
functions the councillors shall take oath to be loyal to the King, to observe 
faithfully the Statute and laws of the state, and to exercise their official func¬ 
tions with the sole purpose of serving the welfare of the King and that of the 
country, which are inseparable. 

Article 30. Councillors shall receive an annual compensation to be 
determined by law. 

Article 31. Councillors shall be relieved of their office on the cessation 
of the duties exercised by them in the councils which cooperate in the forma¬ 
tion of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council. 

Article 32. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall be convoked 
by the King. The King shall also call sessions and postpone them. 

Article 33. The presidents and vice presidents of the Fascist Upper 
Corporative Council shall be appointed by the King. 

The president of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall make the 
necessary appointments to other positions established in the regulations of 
the Upper Council. 

Article 34. No subject may be placed on the agenda of the Fascist 
Upper Corporative Council without the authorization of the King. 

Article 35. The sessions of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council 
shall be public. But when the ministers so request, they may be held in 

Article 36. Voting shall always occur openly. 

Article 37. Bills approved by the Fascist Upper Corporative Council 
shall be presented for the sanction of the King. 

The King may refuse his sanction. He can also ask for a second discussion 
of bills. 

Article 38. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall determine 
by its own internal regulation the manner in which it is to exercise its 

Article 39. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall have the right 



to bring accusations against the King's ministers for| offenses committed 
in the exercise of their duties and to call them before the High Court of 
J ustice. 

V. Judicial Order 

Article 40. The organization and the responsibilities of tribunals shall 
be established by law. 

Article 41. Judges, in the exercise of their judicial functions, shall be 
independent. They shall be irremovable, in accordance with the law on 
judicial organization. 

Article 42. No one may be deprived of the natural right of trial. No 
extraordinary tribunals may therefore be created, except in cases specified 
by law. 

Article 43.. A High Court of Justice shall be instituted for the trial of 
ministers accused by the Fascist Upper Corporative Council. 

It shall be composed of nine members appointed by the King. The 
rules on organization of the High Court of Justice and the exercise of its 
functions shall be established by law. 

Article 44. The hearings of the tribunals in civil matters and argu¬ 
ments in penal matters shall be public, in accordance with the law. 

VI. The Rights and Duties of Citizens 

Article 45. All citizens shall be equal before the law: they shall enjoy 
civil and political rights and shall be admissible to civil and military posi¬ 
tions, with such exceptions as are provided by law. 

Article 46. They shall contribute without distinction, in proportion to 
their means, to the burdens of the state. 

Article 47. No tax may be imposed if it has not been established by 


Article 48. Military service shall be compulsory for all, in accordance 
with the laws on military conscription. 

Article 49. Personal liberty is guaranteed. No one may be arrested or 
brought before courts of justice except in cases provided for by law and in 
the form prescribed thereby. 

Article 50. The home shall be inviolable. No search of houses can 
take place except by virtue of the law and in the form prescribed thereby. 

Article 51. The press shall be free, but the abuse of such freedom shall 
be curbed by law. 

Article 52. All property, without any exception, shall be inviolable. 
Nevertheless, when it shall be legally ascertained that the public interest so 
demands, a person may be required to surrender his property in whole or 
in part, with just indemnification therefor, in accordance with the laws. 



VII. Final Provisions 

Article 53. All laws contrary to the present statute are abrogated. 
Article 54. The present Statute shall come into effect on June 4. 1030- 

Given in Rome, June 3, 1939-XVII. 

Sh. Verlaci, President of the Council and Minister of Public Works 
ad interim; T. Mborja, Minister Secretary of the National Fascist 
Party; Xiiafer Ypi, Minister of Justice; Malig Bushati, Min¬ 
ister of the Interior; Fejzi Alizotti, Minister of Finance; Ernest 
Koliqi, Minister of Public Instruction; Anton Be£A, Minister of 
National Economy . 

Law No. 1115 regarding the Fusion of the Albanian Armed Forces with the 
Corresponding Italian Armed Forces, July 13, 1939 3 


Victor Emmanuel III, by the grace of God and by the will of the People 
King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor of Ethiopia. 

The Senate and the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations, through their 
legislative committees, having approved; 

We have authorized and We promulgate as follows: 

Article i. In view of the union of the destinies of the Italian People 
and the Albanian People, the Albanian armed forces shall be fused with the 
corresponding Italian armed forces. 

Article 2. The government of the King shall be authorized to issue 
the necessary regulations for the implementation of the present law. 

Given at San Rossore this day, July 13, 1939-XVII. 

Mussolini—Ciano—D i Revel 

Seen: The Keeper of the Seal, Grandi. 

Royal Decree No. 194 concerning Discipline of War, June 9, 1940 4 


Article i. The Kingdom of Albania shall consider itself at war with 
those states with which the Kingdom of Italy may be at war. 

* •£?££* f decreti , 1939 , No. 1115; published in the Gazzelta uJiciaU, August 11.1930, No. 187- 
4 Flelorja Zyrtare, 1940, No. 93. 



Article 2. The Supreme Commander of the Italian Armed Forces shall 
exercise his authority over all the armed forces which may operate in the 
territories, waters, and skies of Albania. 

The Albanian Fascist Militia, the Albanian Forestry Militia, the Armed 
Police Force, and any other armed force which may be formed in Albania, 
shall, in the event of war, be subject to the orders of the aforementioned 
Supreme Commander. 

Rome, June 9, 1940-XVII. 


Sii. Verlaci 

2 . administration 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 43 concerning the Order for the Promotion and 
Appointment of New State Employees, January 25, 1940 6 



Article i. Promotions shall normally take place from the lower grade 
to that immediately above, in accordance with the decisions, expressed by 
votes, of a committee composed of the minister in charge (who shall preside), 
the permanent counselor, the secretary general, and department heads of 
each ministry. 

Tirana, January 25, 1940--XVIII. 

Francesco Jacomini 

Sh. Verlaci—I. Mborja—Xiiafer Ypi 
M. Busiiati —E. Koliqi 

Royal Decree concerning Personnel on Mission in Albania 
January 29, 1940 6 


VVe have decreed and We decree: 

To each of the following personnel not belonging to the administration, 
on mission in Albania to discharge special technical duties entrusted to 
them by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, there is granted for the duration of 
the mission the annual salary indicated beside each name: 

* FUtorja Zyrtare, 1940, No. 22, p. 6. • Gazzetta uffidale, 1940, No. 68. 



Surname and Name 
Califano, Dot*. Simmaco 

Bellavitis, Ing. Guisto 

Can nobio, Ing. Antonio 
Bert£, Ing. Giulio 
•Gonfalonieri, Ing. Corrado 
Giro, Comm. Giovanni 

Position Amount of Annual Salary 

Director of the Italian Day 56.000 

Dispensary of Tirana 

Organization of Public Works 56.000 

in Albania 

Do. 56.000 

Do. 56.000 

Do. 56.000 

Expert in After-Work Recrea- 56.000 

tion Centers for Albanian 

Given in Rome, this day, January 29, 1940-XVIII. 

Mussolini—Ciano—D i Revel 

Seen: The Keeper of the Seal, Grandi. 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 163 concerning Employment of Counselors, 

July 16, 1942 7 


Article i. The Minister of Finance is hereby authorized to employ as 
many as four persons from the register of the Italian administration as 
counselors for his department. 

Such persons shall be allowed salaries in accordance with their grades, 
together with the Albanian allowance and travel and per diem expenses. 

Tirana, July 16, 1942-XX. 
Siiuk Gurakuqi 

Francesco Jacominj 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 176 concerning Regulations with respect to the 
Appointment and Jurisdiction of Under Secretaries of State, 
November 4, 1942 8 


Article i. At every ministry there may be nominated one or more 
under secretaries of state. 

The under secretaries of state shall be nominated by decree of the Vice¬ 
gerent on the suggestion of the President of Ministers. 

7 GazzeUa uffictale del Regno d'Albania, 1942, No. 93. 8 Ibid., 1942, No. 130, pp. 7-8. 



Article 2. The secretaries of state, aside from exercising the functions 
delegated to them by the minister, shall preside over administrative councils; 
shall supervise the application of the laws and regulations and the prompt 
execution of the orders of the minister; shall control the outlying offices 
under their jurisdiction; shall, if delegated, represent the minister before the 
legislative committees of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council; shall attend 
the meetings of the Council of Ministers when summoned by its president. 

Tirana, November 4, 1942-XXI. 
M. Kruja—Shuk Gurakuqi 

Francesco Jacomini 


Vicegerent's Decree Creating the Albanian Fascist Party, June 2, 1939 9 


The Statute of the Albanian Fascist Party 

I. The Albanian Fascist Party is a voluntary civilian militia under the 
orders of Benito Mussolini, the Creator and Duce of Fascism. 

II. The Fascist Party shall be the only party in Albania. 

III. The Albanian Fascist Party aims at the political education of the 
Albanians for the achievement of an ever higher degree of social justice, 
according to the principles of the Fascist Revolution. 

IX. The Fascist, when admitted to the party, shall take the oath and 
sign his name to the text thereof. 

The text of the oath is as follows: 44 1 swear to carry out the orders of the 
Duce, Founder of the Empire and Creator of the New Albania, and to serve 
with all my strength, and if necessary with my blood, the cause of the 
Fascist Revolution.” 

XIV. The organizations of the Albanian Fascist Party shall be the 
following: / 

The Fascist University Groups. 

The Littorio Youth (Group). 

The Feminine Fascists. 

The After-Hour Recreational Centers ( Dopolavoro ). 

The Fascist Relief Organization. 

Labor organizations shall be directly dependent on the Albanian Fascist 

• • • • • 

• Fletorja Zyrtare, 1939, No. 39. 


documents: Albania 

XVII. The hierarchy of the Albanian Fascist Party shall be the following: 

1. The Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party. 

2. The Members of the Central Directorate. 

3. The Federal Secretaries. 

4. The Members of the Federal Directorate. 

5. The Political Secretary of the Fasces. 

6. Members of the Fascio Directorate. 

7. The Trustee of the regional Fascist Group. 

8. The members of the regional Fascist Council Group. 

9. The Sector Head. 

10. The Nucleus Head. 

XVIII. The collegiate organs of the Albanian Fascist Party shall be: 

1. The Central Directorate. 

2. The Central Council. 

3. The Directorate of the Federation of Fascist Groups. 

4. The Directorate of the Fascio. 

5. The Council of the regional Fascist Group. 

XIX. The Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party shall be appointed 
and dismissed by the Vicegerent of His Majesty the King Emperor on the 
proposal of the President of the Council of Ministers, after consultation with 
the Secretary of the National Fascist Party. 

To the Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party shall pertain the title and 
functions of Minister of State. 

XX. The Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party shall receive the 
directives and orders of the Duce from the Secretary of the National Fascist 
Party, who shall be represented in the Albanian Fascist Party by a National 
Fascist Party Inspector, assisted by a Federal Secretary and by Federal 
inspectors of the National Fascist Party. 

XXI. The Secretary of the Albanian Fascist Party shall propose to the 
Vicegerent of His Majesty the King Emperor the appointment and dismissal 
of members of the Central Directorate of the Albanian Fascist Party, among 
whom he shall designate two vice secretaries and the administrative secre¬ 
tary; he shall designate, subject to the approval of His Majesty the King 
Emperor, the representatives of the Albanian Fascist Party in the Central 
Commit tee of Corporative Economy and in the councils, as well as in the 
central and local offices of each ministry; 

• • • • • 

XLVII. No modification may be made in the present statute without 
previous agreement with the National Fascist Party. 

Jacomini, Vicegerent 

Veri.aci, President of the Council of Ministers 
of Albania 

Starace, Secretary of the Party 



Vicegerent’s Decree No. 73 concerning the Institution of the Central Council 
of Corporative Economy, March 14, 1940 10 


Article i. The Central Council of Corporative Economy is hereby 
instituted. It shall be called upon to give its opinion on all matters relating 
to economics and labor on which the government may be questioned. 

Article 2. The Central Council of Corporative Economy shall be 
composed of a president, four vice presidents, and twenty-four active 
members, and shall include four sections: a) agriculture; b) industry; c ) com¬ 
merce; d) professions and arts. 

Article 3 . It is required that the members of the Central Council of 
Corporative Economy shall: 

£? a y e rea ched the age of twenty-five years. 

b) Enjoy civil and political rights. 

c) Be members of the Fascist Party. 

Tirana, March 14, 1940-XVIII. 

Sh. Verlaci —T. Mborja—Fejzi Alizotti 

Francesco Jacomini 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 101 concerning Attributions and Functioning of the 
Fascist Upper Corporative Council, April 3, 1940 11 


Article i. Pursuant to item IV of the Basic Statute of the Kingdom, a 
Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall be established in place of the 
Parliament, which has been abolished. 

Article 2. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall collaborate 
with the government in the formulation of laws. 

Article 3. The ministers of state shall be members ex officio of the 
Central Council of Corporative Economy and hence of the Fascist Upper 
Corporative Council. 

• • • • • 

Article 5. Members of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council, before 
being admitted to the exercise of their legislative functions, shall take the 
oath in plenary assembly in accordance with the formula indicated in 

Article 29 of the Statute of the Kingdom. 

• • • • • 

Article 8. The Fascist Upper Corporative Council shall exercise its 
functions through its plenary assembly, the General Budget Committee, and 
the legislative committees. 

For specific matters special committees may be appointed. 

• • • • • 

10 Fletorja Zyrtare , 1940, No. 40, p. 8 u Ibid., 1940, No. 52, p. 6. 



Article ii. The following bills shall be discussed and voted on by the 
Fascist Upper Corporative Council in plenary assembly, on the report of the 
respective committees in charge: those concerning the composition and 
functioning of the Fascist Upper Corporative Council; the right of the 
executive power to issue judicial rules; the corporative order; international 
treaties involving changes in the boundaries of state territories; the budget 
and expenses relating thereto; rules concerning judicial orders and the duties 
of judges; orders of the Council of State and of the Court of Accounts; 
questions of guaranties for magistrates and for other irremovable officials; 
legislative appointments of a general character; the general accounts ren¬ 
dered by the state as to state institutions and administrative bodies of 
any nature whatsoever, if directly or indirectly subsidized by the state 

Tirana, April 3, 1940-XVIII. 
Sh. Verlaci 

Francesco Jacomini 


Vicegerent’s Decree No. 114 concerning the Statute of the “Skanderbeg 
Foundation,” National Body for Cultural Growth in Albania, 

April 8, 1940 12 


Article i. The institution of a national body for cultural growth in 
Albania, with headquarters in Tirana, under the name “Skanderbeg 
Foundation," is approved. 

Article 2. The Skanderbeg Foundation shall be composed of two au- 
tonomous sections having distinct aims: 

1. The first section shall consist of the “Institute for Albanian Studies,” 
the purpose of which shall be to encourage and continue the development of 
philosophical, literary, artistic, and historic culture in Albania; 

2. The second section shall consist of the 44 1 talo-Albanian Skanderbeg 
Club,” whose objective shall be the improvement of social relations between 
Albanians and Italians. 

Each of these two sections shall be subject to its own statutes, approved 
by decree of the Vicegerent. 

• • • • « 

Article 4. The endowment of the "Skanderbeg Foundation” shall 
consist of the following: 

“ Fletorja Zyrtare , 1940, No. 58, p. 6. 



1. The capital granted by the founder, who is the Minister of Foreign 

Affairs of the Kingdom of Italy, amounting to eight million 
Italian lire, of which six million are invested in the building located 
in Tirana, and two million lire in corresponding money of the 

2. Bequests, gifts, and other contributions which may come to the Foun¬ 

dation without other specific purpose. 

3. Credit balances, of which annual provisions as to investment shall be 


Article 6. The Institute of Albanian Studies shall be composed of 
active Albanian and Italian members, corresponding Albanian and Italian 
members, and foreign corresponding members in unlimited number, chosen 
from among scholars who have most distinguished themselves or who have 
taken an interest in the cultural studies of Albania. 

Article 7. All members of the Institute of Albanian Studies shall be 
appointed by decree of the Vicegerent on the proposal of the Minister for 
Public Instruction. 

• • • . . 

Article io. The general rules of administration of the Foundation and 
special rules concerning the individual sections shall be established by an- 
other decree. 

* • • • • 

Tirana, April 8, 1940-XVIII. 

Francesco J acomini 

E. Koliqi —M. Boshati 


Vicegerent’s Decree No. 53 concerning Authorization of Operation for the 
S.A.C.I.A., February 14, 1940 13 


We, Vicegerent of His Majesty Victor Emmanuel III, by the grace of 
God and by the will of the People King of Italy and of Albania, Emperor 

By virtue of the authority vested in us; 

Pursuant to the deliberations of the Tirana Tribunal under date of 
December 30, 1939-XVIII, on the matter of the act of establishment 
and of the Statute of the Italo-Albanian Commercial Company Limited 
(Society Anonima Compagnia Commercial Italo-Albanese [S.A.C.I.A.]) 
in accordance with existing provisions of the law; 

u FUlorja Zyrlare, 1940, No. 27, p. 9. 

28 o 

documents: Albania 

On the proposal of the Ministry for National Economy; 

We have decreed and we decree: 

The Italo-Albanian Commercial Company, Ltd. (S.A.C.I.A.) is author¬ 
ized to carry on its activities in the territory of the Kingdom, with due 
respect to the laws in effect therein. 

Tirana, February 14, 1940-XVIII. 

A. Beq:a 

Francesco Jacomini 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 83 concerning the Covenant with the Italian Coal 
Co. (Azienda Carboni Italiani [A.Ca. I.]), March 14, 1940 14 


We have decreed and we decree: 

Article i. The order on execution of the Covenant stipulated between 
the Albanian Government and the Italian Coal Co. (A.Ca.I.) is attached 
to the present decree. 

Tirana, March 14, 1940-XVIII. 
Sn. Verlaci — F. Alizotti 

Francesco Jacomini 
A. Be£a 


Between the Royal Albanian Government, represented by His Excellency 
A. Be£a, Minister of National Economy, and The “Italian Coal Co." 
(A.Ca.I.), represented by National Counselor Ingeniere Umberto Cattania 
(as per the attached document) 

• • • • • 

Article i. The Royal Albanian Government grants to the Azienda Carboni 
Italiani for the period of ten (10) years, the exclusive right of search for and production 
of all mineral combustibles for all areas of the Albanian territory which are free from 
permits of search or mining concessions as of the date of the present Covenant. 

Article 2. The Azienda Carboni Italiani shall have the right to extend its activity 
to the areas held under permits or concessions up to the date mentioned, but which 
subsequently may be freed by relinquishment or by the default of the present holders 
of permits or concessions. 

• • • • • 

Tirana, March 1, 1940-XVIII. 

A. Be£A, Minister of National Economy 

Ing. Umberto Cattania, Delegated Administrator of the A.Ca.I . 

14 Fletorja Zyrtare , 1940, No. 43, p. 1. 


jS I 

6. LAW 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 228 concerning Crimes against the Personality of 

the State, January 6, 1940 15 


Article i. Acts against the Integrity , Independence and Unity of the 
State. Whoever commits an act with the aim of subjecting the Albanian 
State, or the Italian State, or a part of either, to the sovereignty of a foreign 
state, or jeopardizing the independence of the two states, shall be punishable 
with death. 

Whoever commits an act with the aim of dissolving the unity of the 
Albanian State or of the Italian State, or of detaching, even temporarily, 
from the sovereignty of the mother country a colony or some other subject 
territory, shall be liable to the same penalty. 

Article 2. Citizen Bearing A rms against the Albanian or the Italian State. 
A citizen who bears arms against the Albanian State or against the Italian 
State, or gives aid to the armed forces of a state at war with the Albanian 
State or the Italian State, shall be punishable by imprisonment. If he is 
charged with a high command or a directive function, he shall be punish¬ 
able by death. 

Any such citizen who, finding himself during hostilities within the ter¬ 
ritory of the enemy state, has committed the act under compulsion imposed 
upon him by the laws of that state itself shall not be punishable. 

A person who for any reason has lost Albanian citizenship shall also be 
considered liable to the effects of the provisions of this decree. 

Article 25. Political Defeatism. Whoever in time of war spreads or 
communicates rumors or false, exaggerated, or colored reports which arouse 
public alarm or lower public morale or otherwise jeopardize the resistance of 
the Albanian Nation or of the Italian Nation concerning the enemy, or carries 
on anywhere activity that might bring damage to the interests of the two 
nations, shall be punishable with imprisonment for not less than five years. 

The sentence shall be for a period of not less than fifteen years: 

1. If the act was committed by propaganda or direct communications 

to soldiers. 

2. If the culprit has acted following an understanding with foreigners. 

The sentence shall be for life imprisonment if the culprit has acted fol¬ 
lowing'an understanding with the enemy. 

Tirana, December 31, 1939-XVIII. 
Xhafer Ypi 

Francesco Jacomtni 

16 Fletorja Zyrlare , 1940. No. 14, p. 13. 


documents: Albania 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 266 concerning New Members of the Provincial 
Committee for Police Internment, October 23, 1942 16 


Article i. The Commander of the Albanian Cohort of Fascist Militia 
shall attend meetings of the Provincial Committee for Police Internment in 
accordance with Article 142 of the Police Code, and the Commander of the 
Albanian Legion of Fascist Militia shall also attend as a member of the 
Central Committee, in accordance with Article 143 of the same code. 

Tirana, October 23, 1942-XX. 
M. Kruja—Siiuk Gurakuqi 

Francesco Jacomini 

Vicegerent’s Decree No. 287 concerning Rules with respect to Persons 

Who Commit Acts Constituting a Menace to Public Safety on the Roads 
and to Telecommunications Service, November 13, 1942 17 


Article i. For any act which constitutes a menace to public safety on 
the roads and to telecommunications services, the administrative sanctions 
which are set forth in these articles shall be enforced irrespective of the 
existing penal laws which may be applicable to individual acts. 

Article 2. A collective fine of from 1,000 to 20,000 Albanian francs shall 
be imposed by final decision of the committee referred to in Article 142 of 
the Police Code in effect, against the inhabitants of villages included within 
a radius of five kilometers from the spot where any of the acts described in 
Article I have been committed. 

Also, the heads of all families residing in the area mentioned in the fore¬ 
going paragraph shall be interned by the aforementioned Committee for 
the period of a year. 

• • • • • 

Article 5. The interned heads of families mentioned in the second para¬ 
graph of Article 2 shall be set free, even before the completion of their 
term, when the authors of the offense have been captured through the 
efforts of the inhabitants of the area mentioned in the first paragraph of 
Article 2. 

• • • • • 

Tirana, November 13, 1942-XXI. 

Francesco Jacomini 

M. Kruja—Shuk Gurakuqi 

x% Gazzeila ufficiale del Regno d'Albania, November 12. IQ42, No. 128, p. 12. 

11 Ibid., November 21, 1942, No. 136, p. 15. 



Law concerning the Reunion of Austria with the German Reich, 

March 13, 1938 1 

The Reich Government has ordained the following law, which is hereby 

Article I. The Federal Constitutional Law of March 13, 1938, ordained 
by the Austrian Federal Government, concerning the reunion of Austria 
with the German Reich, hereby becomes a law of the German Reich. It has 
the following text: 

By virtue of Article 3, Section 2, of the Federal Constitutional Law concerning extraordi¬ 
nary measures in the constitutional field ( B.G.Blatt , I, No. 255, 1934), the Federal Govern¬ 
ment has ordained: 

Article i. Austria is a province of the German Reich. 

Article 2. On Sunday, April 10, 1938, a free and secret plebiscite shall be held for 
German men and women of Austria over twenty years of age on the question of reunion with 
the German Reich. 

Article 3. In the plebiscite the majority of the votes cast shall decide the issue. 

Article 4. The necessary regulations for the implementation and supplementing of this 
Federal Constitutional Law shall be provided by decree. 

Article 5 - This Federal Constitutional Law shall enter into force on the day of its proc¬ 

The Federal Government is entrusted with the execution of this Federal Constitutional 

Vienna, March 13, 1938. 

Article II. The law's at present in force in Austria shall remain in force 
until further notice. The introduction of Reich law into Austria will be 
effected by the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor or by the Reich Minister to 
whom he may delegate this pow’er. 

Article III. The Reich Minister of the Interior, in consultation with 
the other Reich Ministers concerned, is empowered to issue the legal and 
administrative regulations necessary'for the implementation and supplement¬ 
ing of this law. 

Article IV. This law' shall enter into force on the day of its proclama¬ 

Linz, March 13, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor; Goring, General Field 
Marshal, Reich Minister of Aviation; Frick, Reich Minister of the 
Interior; von Ribbentrop, Reich Minister of Foreign Affairs; 
R. Hess, Deputy Fiihrer. 

1 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, No. 21, p. 237. 



Instruction of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Austrian 
Federal Army, March 13, 1938 2 

1. The Austrian Federal Government has just resolved by law upon the 
reunion of Austria with the German Reich. The Government of the Ger¬ 
man Reich has by a law of this date recognized this resolution. 

2. By virtue thereof I give this instruction: The Austrian Federal Army, 
as a component part of the German armed forces, shall be placed under my 
command as of this date. 

3. I commission Infantry General von Bock, Commander in Chief of the 
l-.ighth Army, to assume command of what are now the German armed 
forces within the borders of the Austrian province. 

4. All members of the former Austrian Federal Army shall without delay 
take an oath of allegiance to me as their supreme commander. Infantry 
General von Bock shall immediately issue the necessary orders. 

Adolf Hitler. 

Order pursuant to the Law concerning the Reunion of Austria with the 
German Reich, March 16, 1938 * 

0 • 

By virtue of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the reunion of Austria 
with the German Reich ( RGBl . I, p. 237), I order: 

Section i. (i) The Reich Minister of the Interior shall be the central 
authority for carrying out the reunion of Austria with the German Reich. 

(2) He may delegate his authority to a commissioner, who shall have his 
headquarters in Vienna and whose office shall be designated as that of the 
“ Reich Commissioner for Austria/* 

Section 2. The Commissioner for the Four-Year Plan may delegate 
authority to the Reich Commissioner for Austria. 

Section 3. The Reich Commissioner for Austria shall therefore be ap¬ 
pointed by the Reich Minister of the Interior together with the Commis¬ 
sioner for the Four-Year Plan. 

Munich, March 16, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor 
I* rick, Reich Minister of the Interior 
Goring, General Field Marshal , Commissioner 
for the Four - Year Plan 

* Dokumtntc der dcutschcn Politik , VI, 1, p. 150. 

* Rcichsgcsetzblatt, 1938, I, No. 25, p. 249. 



Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Appointment of 
the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the German Reich, 

April 23, 1938 4 

Article I. As Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the 
German Reich, I appoint Gauleiter Buerckel-Saarpfalz. 

Article II. The Reich Commissioner shall undertake measures for 
political reconstruction and for accomplishing the political, economic, and 
cultural reincorporation of Austria into the German Reich. 

Article III. The Reich Commissioner shall have his headquarters in 
Vienna. He shall be directly responsible to me, and shall have until May 1, 
x 939 » to fulfill his commission in accordance with my instructions. On that 
date his commission shall terminate. 

Article IV. The Reich Commissioner is authorized to issue instructions 
to Reich offices in the province of Austria, to offices of the province of Aus¬ 
tria and of the former Austrian federal provinces, as well as to offices of the 
National Socialist German Workers’ Party, its branches and affiliated asso¬ 
ciations in the province of Austria. He may exercise supervision over public 
agencies and institutions in the province of Austria. 

Article V. (i) The Reich Minister of the Interior, as the central autho¬ 
rity for implementation of the reunion of Austria with the German Reich, 
shall consult with the Reich Commissioner concerning the measures to be 
taken, especially in questions of legal interpretation. 

(2) The office of the Reich Commissioner for Austria (Section 1, subsec¬ 
tion 2, of the order of March 16, 1938, pursuant to the law concerning the re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich, RGBl. I, p. 249) shall be combined 
with that of the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the 
German Reich. 

Berlin, April 23, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor 
Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 
Dr. Lammers, Reich Minister and Chief of the 
Reich Chancellery. 


Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Austrian Pro¬ 
vincial Government, March 15, 1938 6 

By virtue of Article 11 of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the reunion 
of Austria with the German Reich (RGBl. I, p. 237), and of Section 2, para- 
4 ReichsgestlzblaU, 1938, I, No. 61, p. 407. * Ibid., No. 25, p. 249. 


documents: Austria 

graph 4, of the first decree of March 15, 1938, concerning the introduction of 
Reich laws into Austria (. RGBl . I, p. 247), I order: 

Section 1. (1) The Austrian Federal Government shall be designated as 

the “ Austrian Provincial Government/’ 

(2) I commission the Reich Governor in Austria to assume direction of 
the Austrian Provincial Government. He shall have his headquarters in 

Section 2. The Reich Governor is empowered to arrange, with the ap¬ 
proval of the Reich Minister of the Interior, the administrative organization 
of the Provincial Government. 

Section 3. This decree shall enter into force on the day of its proclama¬ 

Vienna, March 15, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor 
Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 

Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Administration 
of Oath to the Officials of the Province of Austria, March 15, 1938 6 

By virtue of Article II of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the reunion 
of Austria with the German Reich (RGBl. I, p. 237), I issue the following 

Section i. Public officials of the province of Austria shall take an oath 
of office upon entrance into service. 

Section 2. The oath of office of public officials reads: "I swear that J 
shall be loyal and obedient to Adolf Hitler, the Fiihrer of the German Reich 
and People, and that I shall observe the laws and conscientiously fulfill the 
duties of my office, so help me God.” 

Section 3. The officials at present in office shall be sworn in forthwith 
in accordance with Section 2. 

Jewish officials shall not be sworn in. 

Section 4. A person is Jewish if he is descended from at least three 
racially full-blooded Jewish grandparents. A grandparent is automatically 
considered a full-blooded Jew if he belonged to the Jewish congregation. 

A Jewish half-breed descended from two full-blooded Jewish grandparents 
is considered a Jew: 

a) If he belonged to the Jewish congregation on September 16, 1935, 

or became a member of it thereafter. 

b) If he was married to a Jew on September 16, 1935, or entered into 

marriage with one thereafter. 

8 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, No. 24, p. 245. 


Section 5. Anyone who refuses to take this oath shall be removed from 

Section 6 . The legal and administrative regulations necessary to the 
implementation of this law shall be issued by the Reich Governor (Austrian 
Provincial Government). 

Section 7. This decree shall enter into force on the day of its proclama¬ 

Vienna, March 15, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Filhrer and Reich Chancellor. 

Order for the Transfer of the Austrian National Bank to the Reichsbank, 

March 17, 1938 7 

By virtue of Article II of the law of March 13,1938, concerning the reunion 
of Austria with the German Reich ( RGBl . I, p. 237), I order: 

Section i. The administration of the Austrian National Bank shall be 
transferred to the Reichsbank. 

Section 2. The Austrian National Bank shall be liquidated, and its 
assets placed by the Reichsbank to the account of the Reich. 

Section 3. In taking over operations, the Reichsbank shall transfer to 
its staff the entire personnel of the Austrian National Bank, with due regard 
for legal and contractual rights. 

Section 4. This order shall enter into force upon its proclamation. 

Berlin, March 17, 1938. 

Adolf Hitler, Filhrer and Reich Chancellor 
Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 
Count Schwerin von Krosigk, Reich Minis¬ 
ter of Finance 

Dr. Hjalmar Schacht, Reich Minister and 
President of the Reichsbank 

Order concerning the Establishment of a Reich Propaganda Office in Vienna, 

March 31, 1938 8 

By virtue of Article III of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich (RGBl. I, p. 237), it is ordered as 
follows: ♦ 

7 ReichsgesetzblaU , 1938, I, No. 27, p. 254. 

• Ibid., No. 46, p. 350. 


documents: Austria 

For the territory of the province of Austria a Reich Propaganda Office 
shall be established with its seat in Vienna. 

Berlin, March 31, 1938. 

Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment 
and Propaganda 
Dr. Goebbels 
Reich Minister of the Interior 
By deputy: Pfundtner 
Reich Minister of Finance 
By deputy: Reinhardt 

Law concerning the Reorganization of the Administration in the Ostmark, 

April 14, 1939 9 

The Reich Government has ordained the following law, which is hereby 

Article I.— The Reich Districts 

Section 1. (1) In the territory of the province of Austria the following 

Reich districts (Reichsgaue) shall be constituted: 

the Reich District of Vienna, comprising the city of Vienna; 

the Reich District of Carinthia, comprising the former Austrian province 
of Carinthia; the administration of the district shall have its seat in 

the Reich District of the Lower Danube, comprising the former Austrian 
province of Lower Austria; the administration of the district shall have 
its seat in Krems-on-the-Danube; 

the Reich District of the Upper Danube, comprising the former Austrian 
province of Upper Austria; the administration of the district shall have 
its seat in Linz; 

the Reich District of Salzburg, comprising the former Austrian province of 
Salzburg; the administration of the district shall have its seat in Salz¬ 

the Reich District of Styria, comprising the former Austrian province of 
Styria; the administration of the district shall have its seat in Graz; 

the Reich District of I yrol, comprising the former Austrian province of 
Tyrol; the administration of the district shall have its seat in Innsbruck. 

(2) The former Austrian province of Vorarlberg shall constitute until fur¬ 
ther notice a separate administrative district and an autonomous corpora¬ 
tion which shall be supervised by the Reich governor in Tyrol. 

* Reichsgesetzblatt, 1939, I, No. 74, p. 777. 


Section 2. The Reich districts shall be state administrative districts and 
autonomous corporations. 

Section 3. (1) The Reich governor ( Reichsstatthalter ) shall be at the 

head of the Reich district. 

(2) The Reich governor is authorized to obtain information from the 
authorities of the special Reich administrations, from the divisions of the 
organization of industrial economy and of the transportation industry, from 
the offices of the Reich Food Authority and of the Reich Culture Chamber, 
and from the offices of other corporations within the Reich district, and to 
bring to their attention the authoritative point of view and the necessary 
measures in accordance with it. In the sphere of law and of the directives 
of the superior Reich authorities he may impart to them instructions for the 
domain of his Reich district; the proper superior Reich authorities may sus¬ 
pend directives of the Reich governor. 

(3) The powers indicated in subsection 2 may not be delegated by the 
Reich governor to the officials associated with him. 

Section 4. (1) Within the area of the Reich district, the Reich governor 

shall conduct the state administration as a Reich administration under the 
official supervision of the Reich Minister of the Interior and in accordance 
with the departmental directives of the Reich ministers in their spheres of 

(2) The authorities of the Reich special administrations within the area 
of the Reich district, with the exception of the Reich justice, finance, rail¬ 
way, and postal administrations, shall be subordinated to the Reich governor. 
The Reich governor shall be at the head of these administrations and shall 
be represented in them by their directors. 

(3) If the intermediate domain of Reich special administrations subor¬ 
dinated to the Reich governor by subsection 2 should include several Reich 
districts, the Ftihrer and Reich Chancellor shall determine to which Reich 
governor these special authorities shall be subordinate. 

(4) Subsections 2 and 3 shall likewise be applicable to the Provincial 
Farmers* Association and to the Provincial Security Institute, with the pro¬ 
vision that the Reich governor shall be represented by the provincial 
farmers’ leader in the direction of the Provincial Farmers' Association and 
by the district chief in the direction of the Provincial Security Institute. 

(5) The duties and powers of the superior agencies of the former Austrian 
provinces shall be transferred to the Reich governor, except in so far as the 
Reich Minister of the Interior, in consultation with the superior Reich 
authorities concerned, may delegate powers to the latter. 

Section 5. (1) The Reich governor, with the approval of the Reich 

minister concerned and of the Reich Minister of the Interior, may establish 
laws by executive order, so far as they are compatible with the sovereign law 
of the Reich. 


documents: Austria 

(2) The powers of the Reich governor under the Reich law of January 30, 

1935 (RGBl. 1 , p. 65) concerning the powers of such governors shall remain 
otherwise unaffected. 

Section 6. (1) The Reich governor shall direct the autonomous admin¬ 

istration of the Reich district under the supervision of the Reich Minister of 
the Interior. 

(2) As an autonomous corporation, the Reich district will have public 
duties to fulfill on its own responsibility. 

(3) The Reich district may regulate its own affairs by statute. 

(4) The Reich governor shall be assisted by counsellors of the district as 
advisers in the sphere of its autonomy. 

Section 7. The Reich governor shall be represented in the state admin¬ 
istration by a general deputy whose office shall be designated as that of 
president of the government and who shall be a Reich official in his own 
right, and in the autonomous administration by a general deputy whose 
office shall be designated as that of district chief and who shall be an official 
of the Reich district as an autonomous corporation. 

Section 8 . (1) The administration of the Reich District of Vienna 
shall be divided into the state administration and the municipal adminstra- 

(2) The Reich District of Vienna, as an autonomous corporation, shall 
be a municipal unit and at the same time shall have the duties of munici¬ 
pality associations of a higher order. 

(3) 1 he Reich governor shall be represented in the state administration 
by a general deputy whose office shall be designated as that of president of 
the government, and in the municipal administration by the first assistant 
of tlie city of Vienna, whose office shall be designated as that of burgomaster. 

(4) The Reich governor shall be assisted by counsellors as advisers in the 
municipal administration. 

(5) In other respects, for the municipal administration of the city of 
Vienna, the German Municipality C ode (DGO) of January 30, 1935 (RGBl. 

I, p. 49) shall be valid. 

Article II.— Administration of Counties and Municipalities 

Section 9. (1) The Reich district shall be divided into counties and 


(2) The counties shall be state administrative units and autonomous 
corporations; the municipalities shall be autonomous corporations. 

(3) The prefect ( Landrat ) shall be at the head of the county; the burgo¬ 
master, with the title of chief burgomaster, at the head of the municipality. 

Section 10. (1) The county prefect shall conduct the entire state ad¬ 

ministration within the area of the county in the limits of the former regular 



(2) The Reich Minister of the Interior, in consultation with the superior 
Reich authorities concerned, shall delegate duties and powers of the former 
special administrations to the county prefect. 

Section i i. Governmental administration in the municipalities shall be 
under the direction of the chief burgomaster, except in so far as other arrange¬ 
ments shall have been made or may be made for police matters. Section 
10, subsection 2, shall also be considered applicable to such administration. 

Section 12. (1) The county prefect shall direct the autonomous admin¬ 

istration of the county, and in this administration he shall be assisted by 
county counsellors as advisers. 

(2) As an autonomous corporation, the county will have public duties to 

fulfill on its own responsibility. 

(3) The county may regulate its affairs by statute. 

(4) Direct supervision over the county as an autonomous corporation 
shall be maintained by the Reich governor, with ultimate supervision by the 
Reich Minister of the Interior. 

Article III .—Final Provisions 

Section 13. (1) The authorities and institutions of the Reich district— 

except in so far as they are authorities and institutions of the Reich district 
as an autonomous corporation, of municipalities or associations of munici¬ 
palities, or of corporations, institutes, and foundations of public law—shall 
be Reich authorities and Reich institutions. 

(2) The officials and instructors serving with these authorities and insti¬ 
tutions shall themselves be Reich officials. 

Section 14. (1) The Reich districts shall be established by September 

30,. 1939 - 

(2) The Reich districts shall be the legal successors of the former Austrian 
provinces as indicated in Section 1. 

Section 15. The regulation of property rights made necessary by the 
execution of this law shall be effected upon the basis of information supplied 
by the Reich governors concerned, by the Reich Minister of the Interior 
and the Reich Minister of Finance, or by the authorities designated by them. 

Section 16. The Reich Minister of the Interior, in consultation with 
the superior Reich authorities concerned, shall transfer to the Reich gover¬ 
nors the duties and powers [formerly exercised by) the Reich governor in 
Austria (Austrian Provincial Government) and by the superior Austrian 
provincial authorities in so far as they shall not have been transferred to the 
superior Reich authorities. 

Section 17. (1) Until the appointment of the Reich governors, the for¬ 

mer provincial chiefs shall conduct the administration of the Reich districts 
according to Sections 4 and 6 and shall exercise the right to issue executive 
orders as defined in Section 2 of the order concerning the right of legislation 

documents: Austria 


in the province of Austria of April 30, 1938 ( RGBl. I, p. 455). The same 
powers shall be exercised for the city of Vienna by the Reich Commissioner 
for the Reunion of Austria with the German Reich; he shall be represented 
by the burgomaster of the city of Vienna. 

(2) from May 1, 1939* until the transfer of the duties and powers of the 
Reich governor in Austria (Austrian Provincial Government) as provided 
in Section 16, the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the 
German Reich shall exercise the powers of the Reich governor in Austria 
(Austrian Provincial Government). 

(3) The privilege of passing provincial legislation in accordance with 
Section 1 of the order concerning the right of legislation in the province of 
Austria of April 30, 1938 ( RGBl. I, p. 455), shall expire for those branches of 
law in respect to which the transfer of powers indicated in Section 16 has 
been effected; in so far as such transfer shall have been made to the former 
provincial chiefs, Section 5, subsection 1, shall be applicable. 

(4) The effective duration of the decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chan¬ 
cellor concerning the appointment of the Reich Commissioner for the Re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich of April 23, 1938 {RGBl. I, p. 407), 
shall be extended to September 30, 1939. 

Section 18. The Reich Minister of the Interior shall issue the legal and 
administrative regulations necessary for the implementation and supple¬ 
menting of this law. 

Section 19. This law shall enter into force on May 1, 1939. 

Berchtesgaden, April 14, 1939. 

Adolf Hitler, Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor; Frick, Reich Minister 
of the Interior; R. Hess, Deputy of the Fiihrer; Goring, Geyieral 
Held Marshal , Premier of Prussia , Commissioner for the Four- 
Year Plan; Count Schwerin von Krosigk, Reich Minister of 
Finance; Dr. Lammers, Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich 


First Decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the Introduction 
of German Reich Law in Austria, March 15, 1938 10 

By virtue of Article II of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich {RGBl. I, p. 237), I order: 

Section 1 . ( 1) The sphere of validity of the official gazettes of the Reich 

shall be extended to the province of Austria. 

10 Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, No. 25, p. 247. 



(2) Reich laws which are proclaimed after the effective date of the law of 
March 13, 1938, concerning the reunion of Austria with the German Reich 
(RGBl. I, p. 237), shall be valid for the province of Austria unless their 
application to the province of Austria is expressly held in abeyance. 

Section 2. From the effective date of this decree, the following shall be 
applied in substance in the province of Austria: 

1. The Reich flag law of September 15, 1935 {RGBl. I, p. 1145). with the 
provision that Jews shall be forbidden to raise the Reich and National Flag 
and to display the Reich colors; 

2. The law against formation of new parties of July 14, 1933 {RGBl. I, 

p. 479 )^ 

3. The law for the preservation of unity of party and state of December 1, 
1933 {RGBl. I, p. 1016), as amended by the law of July 3, 1934 {RGBl. I, 

p. 529); 

4. The law concerning Reich governors of January 30, 1935 {RGBl. I, 
p. 65), with the provision that instructions of Reich ministers to the Reich 
Governor in Austria shall require, until further notice, the approval of the 
Reich Minister of the Interior; 

5. The order for implementation of the Four-Year Plan of October 18, 
1936 {RGBl. I, p. 887); 

6. The Reich law concerning the compulsory registration of members of 
the German State abroad of February 3, 1938 {RGBl. I, p. 113). 

Section 3. (1) Regulations for effecting the transition shall be issued 

by die Reich Minister of the Interior or by the Reich Governor in Austria 
with the approval of the Reich Minister of the Interior. 

(2) By this means regulations of the Reich and regulations of the province 
of Austria can be assimilated to one another. 

(3) Incompatible regulations of the province of Austria shall be invali¬ 

Section 4. This decree shall enter into force on die day of its proclama¬ 


Vienna, March I 5 » ! 938 ‘ 

Adolf Hitler, Fiihrcr and Reich Chancellor 
Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 

Order concerning the Administration of Justice in Austria, March 22,1938 11 

By virtue of Article III of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich {RGBl. I, p. 237), together with the 
order of March 16, 1938 {R&BI. I, p. 249), we order: 

u Reichsgesetzblalt , 1938, I, No. 36, p. 301. 



Section i . The courts in the province of Austria shall administer justice 
in the name of the German people. 

Section 2. (1) The judges, state attorneys, and other officials of the 

judicial administration in the province of Austria entitled to wear robes of 
office shall display the emblems of the state on the right breast of their 
robes of office. 

(2) Provisions for the implementation of the present order shall be issued 
by the Reich Minister of Justice. 

Berlin, March 22, 1938. 

Dr. Guertner, Reich Minister of Justice 
Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 

Order concerning a Change in the Designation of Courts in the Province of 

Austria, August 2, 1938 12 

By virtue of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the reunion of Austria 
with the German Reich ( RGBl . I, p. 237), it is ordered that: 

In the province of Austria the provincial and circuit courts shall be desig¬ 
nated as “Provincial Courts” ( Landgerichte ), and the precinct courts as 
“ District Courts” (. Amtsgerichte ). 

Berlin, August 2, 1938. 

The Reich Minister of Justice 

By deputy: Dr. Schlegelberger 
The Reich Minister of the Interior 
By deputy: Pfundtner 

Law concerning the Accountability of Members of the Former Austrian 
Federal and Provincial Governments and Their Associates, August 17, ig38 u 

The Reich Government has ordained the following law, which is hereby 

Section i. (i) Members of the former Austrian Federal Government 
who during their activity in public life have been guilty of a violation of the 
law or of an act inimical to the people may with their associates be brought 
to trial before a State Tribunal in Vienna. 

(2) This provision shall be valid also for the members of the former local 
governments (burgomasters of the city of Vienna) and their associates. 

w Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, No. 126, p. 998. 13 Ibid., 1938, I, No. 131, p. 1045. 



(3) The State Tribunal in Vienna shall determine whether the law has 
been violated or an act inimical to the people has been committed. 

Section 2. The indictment shall be filed in the name of the German people 
by the Reich Commissioner for the Reunion of Austria with the German Reich. 

Section 3. The Reich Minister of the Interior may withdraw their 
provisional civil rights from persons who are guilty according to the decision 
of the State Tribunal; he may also deprive them of citizenship in the German 
Reich. He may in addition confiscate their property on behalf of the Ger¬ 
man Reich for the purpose of indemnification. 

Section 4. Trials before other courts and before administrative autho¬ 
rities on the same charges shall be adjourned pending the decision o t le 
State Tribunal. The findings of fact by the State Tribunal shall be binding 
upon the courts and upon the administrative authorities. . 

Section 5. The members of the State Tribunal shall be appointed by 
the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor upon the nomination of the Reich Minister 

of the Interior. # , Q 

Section 6 . The detailed arrangements for the establishment of the Mate 
Tribunal, its procedure, and other measures for the implementation of this 
law shall be issued by the Reich Minister of the Interior. 

Berlin, August 17, 1938. 77 

Adolf Hitler, Fuhrer and Retch Chancellor 

Frick, Reich Minister of the Interior 
Dr. Guertner, Reich Minister of Justice 
Dr. Lammers, Reich Minister and Chief of the 
Reich Chancellery 

Order for the Further Adaptation of the Administration of Justice in the 
Province of Austria and in the Sudeten German Territories, 
February 28, 1939 14 


By virtue of Article III of the law of March 13, 1938, concerning the re¬ 
union of Austria with the German Reich {RGBl. I, p. 237), of Section 9 of the 
decree of the Fuhrer and Reich Chancellor concerning the administration of 
the Sudeten German territories of October i, 1938 ( RGBl. I, p. I 33 1 )* anc * 
of Section 10 of the third law for the transfer of the administration of justice 
to the Reich of January 24, 1935 {RGBl. I, p. 68), it is ordered as follows. 

Section i. Abolition of the Authorities. The Supreme Court and the 
office of the attorney general in Vienna are abolished. 

14 ReichsgesetzblaU, 1939 . I, No. 37, p. 35 8 * 


documents: Austria 

Section 2. Transfer of Jurisdiction to the Reich Court . Except as other- 
wise prescribed m this law, the former jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 
shall be transferred to the Reichsgericht, and the duties of the attorney 
general to the Attorney General at the Reichsgericht. 

• • • • 

Berlin, February 28, 1939. 

The Reich Minister of Justice 

By deputy: Dr. Sciilegelberger 
The Reich Minister of the Interior 
By deputy: Dr. Stuckart 


Order concerning Preliminary Regulation of the Vocational School 
System in the Reich District of Sudetenland and in the 
Reich Districts of the Ostmark, May 31,1940 15 

By virtue of Section 7 of the decree of the Fiihrer and Reich Chancellor 
concerning the administration of the Sudeten German territories of October 
1, 1938 (RGBl. I, p. 1331), and by virtue of Article II of the law concerning 
the reunion of Austria with the German Reich of March 13 1938 (RGBl 
I. P- 237), it is ordered: 

Article I. Introduction of Compulsory Schooling 
into the Reich District of Sudetenland 

Section i. The provisions concerning compulsory vocational schooling 
of the law concerning compulsory schooling in the German Reich (Reich 
Compulsory Schooling Law) of July 6, 1938 (RGBl. I, p. 799 ), sha ll be valid 
in the Reich District of Sudetenland. 

Article U—Legal Status of Vocational School Teachers 

Section 2. The principal instructors of public vocational schools shall be 
Reich officials. 

Article III—Regulation of the Support of Schools 

Section 3. (1) The agencies responsible for schools (Schultr&ger) shall be 

charged with the establishment and maintenance of public vocational schools 

(2) Such responsibility for schools shall lie with the city and rural county. 

(3) In exceptional cases the school supervisory board may also admit 
others who will share in the responsibility for the schools. 

u Reicksgesetzblott, 1940, I, No. 97, p. 832. 



(4) The school supervisory board shall comprise the superior administra¬ 
tion authorities. ..... 

Section 4 Municipalities and associations of municipalities may group 

themselves, or may be grouped, into local administrative unions for the 
maintenance of one or more municipal vocational schools, according to the 
provisions of the law regarding the formation of local administrative unions 

of June 7, 1939 (RGBl. I, p. 979 )- . , , . . , 

Section 5. (1) The establishment of a vocational school must have the 

approval of the school supervisory board. . 

(2) Before the establishment of a vocational school, representatives of 

those engaged in the vocations shall be consulted. 

Section 6 . (i) If an agency responsible for schools does not meet its 

obligation as defined in Section 3, subsection 1, the school supervisory board, 
in consultation with the municipal supervisory authorities, shall determine 
the extent of the obligation, taking into consideration the needs of the school 
and the financial ability of the agency in question. 

(2) Against this decision an appeal may be made within two weeks to 
the Reich Minister for Science and Education. He shall make the final 
decision in consultation with the Reich Ministers of the Interior and of 

Finance. . . 

(3) If the agency responsible for schools fails to comply with this decision 

(subsection 1), then application shall be made of the procedure set forth in 
Sections no et sqq. of the German Municipality Code of January 30, 1935 

(RGBl. I, p. 49 )- J t 

Section 7. (1) The personnel costs for the teaching staff of public voca¬ 

tional schools shall be borne by the Reich. 

(2) Personnel costs in the sense of this provision include items of salary 
and maintenance, expense for substitutes, emergency assistance, grants, 
transfer expenses, travelling expenses, and contributions to the social 

security funds. ... . ,. 

(3) The Reich shall also bear the expense of instruction by the subordi¬ 
nate, non-official personnel. 

Section 8 . (1) The agency responsible for schools shall bear the material 

expenses, as well as the personnel expenses of the officials, employees, and 
workers other than teachers engaged by them. 

(2) It shall refund to the Reich a part of the expenses enumerated in Sec¬ 
tion 7, the amount of which is determined by the Reich Minister for Science 
and Education in consultation with the Reich ministers of the Interior and 

of Finance. 

(3) The number of compulsory pupils shall be the basis for the amount of 

Section 9. The agency responsible for schools shall refund to the Reich 
in full those personnel expenses for teachers which it considers necessary in 


documents: Austria 

excess of the provisions for the staff contained in the Reich budget (i.e., 
additional staff). 

Section 10. (1) The Reich shall furnish additional allowances (supple¬ 

mentary grants) to school agencies of limited resources in order to lighten the 
burden of the personnel and the essential expenses of vocational schools. 

(2) Supplementary grants shall be fixed annually by the Reich budget; 
they shall amount to at least 5 per cent of the personnel expenses as defined 
in Section 7, subsections 2 and 3. 

Section II. The services of the local treasuries may be utilized without 
charge in dealing with payments. 

Article IV.— School Counsellors 

Section 12. The Reich Minister for Science and Education, in consulta¬ 
tion with the Reich ministers concerned, shall issue statements concerning 
the summoning of counsellors for vocational schools. 

Article V.— Transition Measures for the Reich Districts of the Oslmark 

Section 13. (1) In the Reich districts of the Ostmark, with the exception 
of the Reich District of Vienna and the administrative district of Vorarlberg, 
the agency responsible for schools shall be the vocational or technical School 
Fund Administration up to a date to be determined by the Reich Minister 
for Science and Education in agreement with the Reich Minister of the 
Interior, in accordance with the vocational or technical school laws of the 
former Austrian provinces. In the administrative district of Vorarlberg the 
agency responsible for the schools shall be the vocational or technical school 
organization. The scope of activities of the vocational or technical school 
fund administrations shall be extended to cover the Reich districts within 
their present boundaries. 

(2) The vocational and technical school councils shall be dissolved. The 
administration of the vocational and technical school funds and the duties 
of the vocational and technical school councils shall be transferred to the 
Reich Governor (State Administration). 

Section 14. (1) The Vienna vocational and technical School Fund Ad¬ 
ministration shall be dissolved. Its property shall be transferred with all 
rights and obligations to the Reich District of Vienna (Municipal Adminis¬ 
tration) in its capacity as agency responsible for the schools. 

(2) 1 he property transferred, as well as all legal acts involved therein, 
shall be free from public fees and taxes. 

^ Section 15. Those responsible for the vocational school system in the 
Reich districts of the Ostmark may levy vocational school assessments in the 
form of percentages, which are calculated on the basis of the assessment for 
the license tax on income and capital. 



Article VI. —Final Provisions 

Section 16 . This order shall not apply to agricultural vocational 

Section 17. The stipulations necessary for the implementation and sup¬ 
plementing of this order shall be issued by the Reich Minister for Science and 
Education in consultation with the Reich ministers concerned. 

Section 18. (1) This order shall be effective as of April I, 1940. 

(2) The provisions concerning the levy of vocational school assessments 
(Section 15) shall be effective as of April 1, 1939 * 

Berlin, May 31, 1940. 

The Reich Minister for Science and 

The Reich Minister of Finance 

Count Schwerin von Krosigk 

The Reich Minister of the Interior 
By deputy: Pfundtner 


Proclamation of July 28, 1941 1 

By decree of July 17, 1941, the Fuhrer of the Greater German Reich, 
Adolf Hitler, has appointed me Reich Commissioner for the Ostland. In 
this area the former free state of Lithuania is also included. 

By a decree of the same date the Fuhrer has likewise appointed Herr Dr. 
Adrian von Rentelen as Commissioner General for the former free state of 
Lithuania. Commissioner General Dr. von Rentelen shall be responsible 
to me, as the representative of the Reich Government for the Reich Commis¬ 
sariat of the Ostland, for the execution in Lithuania of all decrees and orders 
issued by the Reich Government or by myself. His own decrees and orders 
shall likewise be obeyed in every instance within this territory. 

I first address to the inhabitants of the territories south of the Dwina and 
as far as the boundaries of the former free state of Lithuania, inclusive, the 
appeal to cooperate uniformly and with all their energy in carrying out the 
task assigned to me, namely, to restore order and work in these territories. 

Bolshevism was threatening all Europe. It was on the march to attack 
Germany, and it has also inflicted most terrible wounds upon you. If this 
world enemy had been rampant among you a few more years, nothing would 
have been left to you of your property and people. The Bolshevik leaders 
would have carried you off to Siberia, robbed, and murdered you. 

At the cost of their blood the armed forces of the German people have 
overthrown the Bolshevik universal enemy; and so everyone will under¬ 
stand that this German people has therefore now assumed the duty and the 
right to make such arrangements that never again will a similar danger be 
able to threaten anew the traditions of the people of Europe, and indeed their 
whole existence. 

Those who in the past twenty years promised you so much freedom be¬ 
lieved themselves under the necessity of following a policy based upon play¬ 
ing off the Soviet Union against the German Reich. But the moment the 
German Reich, in view of an English attack, renounced certain territories 
in the east as its sphere of interest, this attitude, so fraught with conse¬ 
quences for you all, was revealed in its true form. The Soviet Union was 
able to fall upon you without opposition. 

1 VerkundungsblaU fur das Ostland, 1941, No. I, p. I. 




In spite of everything which has been done to injure Germans and the 
attacks which have been made upon the National Socialist German Reich, 
the Reich Government will take pains, in the interest of your welfare, to 
assure you work, bread, and continued development. However, the Ger¬ 
man administration must demand that its orders be unconditionally obeyed, 
for they serve only this single purpose: the safety of the country and security 
of your lives. The German administration will call upon your representa¬ 
tives in the communities and in the cities for collaboration. It will in case 
of necessity appoint deputies from your people through whom your wishes 
may be transmitted to the Reich Commissioner, the Commissioner General, 
and the district commissioners, and it will permit you to form police organi¬ 
zations for the security of your work and your lives. 

I expect the entire population to obey my directions, in order to heal the 
grave wounds which the universal Bolshevik enemy has inflicted upon you 
also. Only then will culture and wellbeing again be established in the 
future; only then will you all be able to live in peace. The German 
Reich offers you the opportunity. It is now for you to make use of this 

Kaunas,' July 28, 1941. . LoHSE 

Reich Commissioner for the Ostland 

Order pursuant to the Assumption of the Administration by the Reich 
Commissioner for the Ostland, August 18, 1941 2 

Section i. With the assumption of the administration, the executive 
power is transferred to the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland. 

The exercise of superior military power and authority has been transferred 
by the Fuhrer to the Commander of the Armed Forces in the Ostland; and 
his authority is not affected by this order. 

Section 2. Regulations for the civil population in the territories admin¬ 
istered by the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland will be issued by the 
offices of the German Civil Administration. 

The authority of the offices of the Commander of the Armed Forces in the 
Ostland to requisition contributions for the tasks of the Reich defense is 
not affected by the present provisions. 

Section 3. Officers of the German Civil Administration are: the Reich 
Commissioner for the Ostland; the Commissioner General; the Chief Com¬ 
missioner; and the District Commissioners. 

Section 4. The German Civil Administration takes over all of the real 

* VerkundungsblaU , 1941, No. 1, p. 3 * 


Commissioner*'foS'cStlamUehi ,chb 'i""' 0 '''* administered by the Reich 
Republics, its memberaZ t0thc U " io '’ ° ,S °'>« Socialist 

nerslnps, including all claims invesime,,^ 0 ™^ 0118 ’ associat >ons, and part- 

“ of J une 2 °. ' 94 ', in a manner to be delermif r T’ interests o{ a!I kiads 
tions. e< ^ ,n detail by further regula- 

1941, shall be un 1 awful'T"they ha wfnot*bT" S °! ? tfc " >ade after July 20 ' 
cies. Measures already taken by Germ e€r l. mac e tllr °ngh German agen- 
in force. by German offi «rs shall remain irrevocably 

Arrangements concerning the status „ 
remain subject to change. Property and possessions shall 

The German armed forces shall o. 
erty of the Soviet Russian armed forces. ^ P ° Wer of dls P osa I over the prop- 
Section 5. The official language in the R P ,vi, r 
shall be German. In each general district the I Comm >ssanat of Ostland 
be permitted. ,Ct ^ lan K" a ge of the province shall 

Section 6. This regulation shall be effective on a 
bon. ective on the day of its publica- 

Kaunas, August 18, 1941. 

Rnch C °™missioner for the Satin' 


Order concerning the Establishment and Or^n- 

Judiciary System in the